Synergistic Compositions That Treat or Inhibit Pathological Conditions Associated With Inflammatory Response

ABSTRACT

A natural formulation of compounds that would to modulate inflammation is disclosed. The formulation would also inhibit expression of COX-2, inhibit synthesis of prostaglandins selectively in target cells, and inhibit inflammatory response selectively in target cells. The compositions containing at least one fraction isolated or derived from hops. Other embodiments relate to combinations of components, including at least one fraction isolated or derived from hops, tryptanthrin and conjugates thereof, rosemary, an extract or compound derived from rosemary, a triterpene species, or a diterpene lactone or derivatives or conjugates thereof.

CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

This patent application is a continuation-in-part of U.S. applicationSer. No. 10/400,293, filed Mar. 26, 2003, and a continuation-in-part ofU.S. application Ser. No. 10/401,283, filed Mar. 26, 2003, both of whichclaim the benefit under 35 U.S.C. §119(e) to provisional application No.60/450,237, filed on Feb. 25, 2003, and provisional application No.60/420,383, filed on Oct. 21, 2002. The contents of each of theseearlier applications are hereby incorporated by reference as if recitedherein in their entirety.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

1. Field of the Invention

The present invention relates generally to synergistic compositions thattreat or inhibit pathological conditions associated with tissue-specificactivation of inflammation and to methods of modulating inflammation incells. More specifically, the invention relates to compositioncomprising a fraction isolated or derived from hops along with asynergist, such as rosemary, an extract derived from rosemary, acompound derived from rosemary, a triterpene species, a diterpenelactone species, and tryptanthrin.

2. Description of the Related Art

Cyclooxygenase (prostaglandin endoperoxide synthase, EC 1.14.991, COX)catalyzes the rate-limiting step in the metabolism of arachidonic acidto prostaglandin H₂ (PGH₂), which is further metabolized to variousprostaglandins, prostacyclin and thromboxane A2 (c.f. FIG. 1). In theearly 1990s, it was established that COX exists in two isoforms,commonly referred to as COX-1 and COX-2. It was subsequently determinedthat the COX-1 and COX-2 proteins are derived from distinct genes thatdiverged well before birds and mammals. Prostaglandins (PGs) generatedvia the COX-1 and COX-2 pathways are identical molecules and thereforehave identical biological effects. COX-1 and COX-2, however, maygenerate a unique pattern and variable amounts of eicosanoids;therefore, relative differences in the activation of these isozymes mayresult in quite dissimilar biological responses. Differences in thetissue distribution and regulation of COX-1 and COX-2 are now consideredcrucial for the beneficial as well as adverse effects of COX inhibitors.

The generally held concept (COX dogma) is that COX-1 is expressedconstitutively in most tissues whereas COX-2 is the inducible enzymetriggered by pro-inflammatory stimuli including mitogens, cytokines andbacterial lipopolysaccharide (LPS) in cells in vitro and in inflamedsites in vivo. Based primarily on such differences in expression, COX-1has been characterized as a housekeeping enzyme and is thought to beinvolved in maintaining physiological functions such as cytoprotectionof the gastric mucosa, regulation of renal blood flow, and control ofplatelet aggregation. COX-2 is considered to mainly mediateinflammation, although constitutive expression is found in brain, kidneyand the gastrointestinal tract. Therefore, it would be desirable todown-regulate tissue-specific or cell-specific expression of COX-2.

Arachidonic acid serves as the primary substrate for the biosynthesis ofall PGs. PGs are ubiquitous hormones that function as both paracrine andautocrine mediators to affect a myriad of physiological changes in theimmediate cellular environment. The varied physiological effects of PGsinclude inflammatory reactions such as rheumatoid arthritis andosteoarthritis, blood pressure control, platelet aggregation, inductionof labor and aggravation of pain and fever. The discovery 30 years agothat aspirin and other non-steroidal analgesics inhibited PG productionidentified PG synthesis as a target for drug development. There are atleast 16 different PGs in nine different chemical classes, designatedPGA to PGI. PGs are part of a larger family of 20-carbon-containingcompounds called eicosanoids; they include prostacyclins, thromboxanes,and leukotrienes. The array of PGs produced varies depending on thedownstream enzymatic machinery present in a particular cell type. Forexample, endothelial cells produce primarily PGI₂, whereas plateletsmainly produce TXA₂.

Prostaglandins (PG) are believed to play an important role inmaintenance of human gastric mucosal homeostasis. Current dogma is thatCOX-1 is responsible for PG synthesis in normal gastric mucosa in orderto maintain mucosal homeostasis and that COX-2 is expressed by normalgastric mucosa at low levels, with induction of expression during ulcerhealing, following endotoxin exposure or cytokine stimulation. It nowappears that both COX-1 and COX-2 have important physiological roles inthe normal gastric mucosa.

Compounds that inhibit the production of PGs by COX have becomeimportant drugs in the control of pain and inflammation. Collectivelythese agents are known as non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs)with their main indications being osteoarthritis and rheumatoidarthritis. However, the use of NSAIDs, and in particular aspirin, hasbeen extended to prophylaxis of cardiovascular disease. Over the lastdecade, considerable effort has been devoted to developing new moleculesthat are direct inhibitors of the enzymatic activity of COX-2, with theinference that these compounds would be less irritating to the stomachwith chronic use. Therefore, it would be desirable to inhibitinflammation response selectively in target cells.

U.S. patent application 2002/0086070A1 of Kuhrts entitled,“ANTI-INFLAMMATORY AND CONNECTIVE TISSUE REPAIR FORMULATIONS” describesa hops component that has an IC₅₀-WHMA COX-2/COX-1 ratio ranging fromabout 0.23 to about 3.33. Example 1 of the application describes acomposition containing an extract obtained through supercritical carbondioxide extraction of whole hops (CO₂-extract) comprising 42% humulone.

U.S. Pat. No. 6,391,346 entitled, “ANTI-INFLAMMATORY, SLEEP-PROMOTINGHERBAL COMPOSITION AND METHOD OF USE” describes an orally administeredcomposition capable of reducing inflammation in animals, while promotingsleep for such animals. The composition contains hydroalcoholic extractof hops and supercritical carbon dioxide extract of hops which are usedto promote sleep.

An ideal formulation for the treatment of inflammation would inhibit theinduction and activity of COX-2 without inhibiting the synthesis of PGE₂in gastric mucosal cells. However, conventional non-steroidalanti-inflammatory drugs lack the specificity of inhibiting COX-2 withoutaffecting gastric PGE₂ synthesis and are at risk to cause damages on thegastrointestinal system, when used for extended periods. Indeed, eventhe newly developed, anti-inflammatory drugs such as rofecoxib andcelexocib produce untoward gastric toxicity in the form of inducedspontaneous bleeding and delay of gastric ulcer healing.

Thus, it would be useful to identify a formulation of compounds thatwould specifically inhibit or prevent the synthesis of prostaglandins byCOX-2 with little or no effect on synthesis of PGE₂ in the gastricmucosa. Such a formulation, which would be useful for preserving thehealth of joint tissues, for treating arthritis or other inflammatoryconditions, has not previously been discovered. The term “specific orselective COX-2 inhibitor” was coined to embrace compounds or mixturesof compounds that selectively inhibit COX-2 over COX-1. However, whilethe implication is that such a calculated selectivity will result inlower gastric irritancy, unless the test materials are evaluated ingastric cells, the term “selective COX-2 inhibitor” does not carryassurance of safety to gastrointestinal cells. Only testing of compoundaction in target tissues, inflammatory cells and gastric mucosal cells,will identify those agents with low potential for stomach irritation.

The major problem associated with ascertaining COX-2 selectivity (i.e.low gastric irritancy) is that differences in assay methodology can haveprofound effects on the results obtained. Depicted in Table 1 are thecategories of the numerous in vitro assays that have been developed fortesting and comparing the relative inhibitory activities of NSAID andnatural compounds against COX-1 and COX-2. These test systems can beclassified into three groups: (1) systems using animal enzymes, animalcells or cell lines, (2) assays using human cell lines, or humanplatelets and monocytes, and (3) currently evolving models using humancells that are representative of the target cells for theanti-inflammatory and adverse effects of NSAID and dietary supplements.Generally, models using human cell lines or human platelets andmonocytes are the current standard and validated target cell models havenot been forthcoming. A human gastric cell line capable of assessingpotential for gastric irritancy is a need.

TABLE 1 Classification of test systems for in vitro assays assessingCOX-2 selectivity of anti-inflammatory compounds† TEST SYSTEMS ANIMALHUMAN TARGET Enzymes Enzymes Human Gastric Mucosa Cells Cells CellsHuman Chondrocytes Cell lines Cell lines Human Synoviocytes OTHER SYSTEMVARIABLES 1. Source of arachidonic acid—endogenous or exogenous; 2.Various expression systems for gene replication of COX-1 and COX-2; 3.The presence or absence of a COX-2 inducing agent; 4. COX-2 inducingagents are administered at different concentrations and for differentperiods of time; 5. Duration of incubation with the drug or witharachidonic acid; 6. Variation in the protein concentration in themedium. †Adapted from Pairet, M. and van Ryn, J. (1998) Experimentalmodels used to investigate the differential inhibition ofcyclooxygenase-1 and cyclooxygenase-2 by non-steroidal anti-inflammatorydrugs. Inflamm. Res 47, Supplement 2S93-S101 and incorporated herein byreference.

The enzymes used can be of animal or human origin, they can be native orrecombinant, and they can be used either as purified enzymes, inmicrosomal preparations, or in whole-cell assays. Other system variablesinclude the source of arachidonic acid. PG synthesis can be measuredfrom endogenously released arachidonic acid or exogenously addedarachidonic acid. In the later case, different concentrations are usedin different laboratories.

Second, there are various expression systems for gene replication ofrecombinant COX-1 and COX-2 enzymes. In addition, the cells transfectedwith the Cox-1 or Cox-2 gene can be of diverse origins, for instance,insect cell lines or COS cells. Third, the absence or presence of aCOX-2 inducing agent can vary. Cells that are stably transfected Withthe recombinant enzymes express this enzyme constitutively and noinducing agent is used. This is in fundamental contrast with other cellsin which COX-2 has to be induced. Induction of COX-2 is commonlyperformed using bacterial LPS or various cytokines such asinterleukin-1β or tumor necrosis factor. Additionally, these endotoxinsand cytokines are administered at various concentrations.

Fourth, the duration of the incubation with the test agent, the COX-2inducing agent, or with arachidonic acid varies among differentlaboratories. These differences can influence the quantitative outcomeof the study, because the inhibition of COX-2 is time dependent.Finally, the protein concentration of the medium can vary; this is anissue for compounds that can bind avidly to plasma proteins.

An ideal assay for COX-2 selectivity would have the followingcharacteristics: (1) whole cells should be used that contain nativehuman enzymes under normal physiological control regarding expression;(2) the cells should also be target cells for the anti-inflammatory andadverse effects of the compounds; (3) COX-2 should be induced, therebysimulating an inflammatory process, rather than being constitutivelyexpressed; and (4) PG synthesis should be measured from arachidonic acidreleased from endogenous stores rather than from exogenously addedarachidonic acid.

Differences in methodology for can explain a dramatic difference in theresults obtained for COX inhibition. For example, when assayed againstthe purified enzyme, ursolic acid exhibited an IC₅₀ of 130 μM, faroutside of possible physiologically obtainable concentrations [Ringbom,T. et al. (1998) Ursolic acid from Plantago major, a selective inhibitorof cyclooxygenase-2 catalyzed prostaglandin biosynthesis. J Nat Prod 61,1212-1215]. In the RAW 264.7 murine macrophage line, Suh et al. reportan IC₅₀ for ursolic acid of approximately 40 μM [Suh, N., et al. (1998)Novel triterpenoids suppress inducible nitric oxide synthase (iNOS) andinducible cyclooxygenase (COX-2) in mouse macrophages. Cancer Res 58,717-723]; and in phorbol 12-myristate 13-acetate stimulated humanmammary cells, the approximate median inhibitory concentration ofursolic acid was 3.0 μM [Subbaramaiah, K. et al. (2000) Ursolic acidinhibits cyclooxygenase-2 transcription in human mammary epithelialcells. Cancer Res 60, 2399-2404].

No laboratory has, as yet, developed an ideal assay for COX-2selectivity. The whole cell system most commonly used for Rx and OTCproducts is the human whole blood assay developed by the William HarveyInstitute [Warner, T. D. et al. (1999) Nonsteroid drug selectivities forcyclo-oxygenase-1 rather than cyclo-oxygenase-2 are associated withhuman gastrointestinal toxicity: a full in vitro analysis. Proc NatlAcad Sci U S A 96, 7563-7568]. To date, this assay format has developedmore data supporting clinical relevance than any other. However, newresearch in the role of constitutive expression of COX-2 in normalgastric mucosa necessitates revisiting the relevance of the use ofplatelets to model COX-1 inhibition in the absence of COX-2. Theextrapolation of gastrotoxicity from platelet studies is no longer on asound molecular basis. The validation of a human gastric mucosal cellline for establishing the potential target tissue toxicity ofcyclooxygenase inhibitors represents a critical need for the developmentof safe and effective anti-inflammatory agents.

Therefore, it would be useful to identify a composition that wouldspecifically inhibit or prevent the expression of COX-2 enzymaticactivity in inflammatory cells, while having little or no effect on PGE₂synthesis in gastric mucosal cells so that these formulations could beused with no gastrointestinal upset. Furthermore, such formulationsshould allow for healing of pre-existing ulcerative conditions in thestomach.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

Thus, it would be useful to identify a formulation of compounds thatwould to modulate inflammatory response. Such a formulation haswidespread applications.

It would also be useful to identify a formulation of compounds thatwould inhibit expression of COX-2, inhibit prostaglandin synthesisselectively in target cells, or inhibit inflammation responseselectively in target cells. For example, it would also be useful toidentify a formulation of compounds that would specifically inhibit orprevent the synthesis of prostaglandins by COX-2 in inflammatory cellswith little or no effect on PGE₂ synthesis in gastric mucosal cells.Such a formulation, which would be useful for preserving the health ofjoint tissues, for treating arthritis or other inflammatory conditions,has not previously been discovered. Preferably, the formulations have amedian effective concentration for COX-2 inhibition in inflammatorycells that is minimally ten times greater than the median effectiveconcentration for the inhibition of PGE₂ synthesis in gastric cells. Forexample, if the median inhibitory concentration for COX-2 of a testformulation was 0.2 μg/mL in the murine macrophage RAW 264.7, theformulation would not be considered to have low potential for gastricirritancy unless the median inhibitory concentration for PGE₂ synthesisin gastric cells was equal to or greater than 2 μg/mL.

A preferred embodiment comprises compositions containing at least onefraction isolated or derived from hops (Humulus lupulus). Examples offractions isolated or derived from hops are alpha acids, isoalpha acids,reduced isoalpha acids, tetra-hydroisoalpha acids, hexa-hydroisoalphaacids, beta acids, and spent hops. Preferred compounds of fractionsisolated or derived from hops, include, but are not limited to,humulone, cohumulone, adhumulone, isohumulone, isocohumulone,isoadhumulone, dihydro-isohumulone, dihydro-isocohumulone,dihydro-adhumulone, tetrahydro-isohumulone, tetrahydro-isocohumulone,tetrahydro-adhumulone, hexahydro-isohumulone, hexahydro-isocohumulone,and hexahydro-adhumulone. Preferred compounds can also bearsubstituents, such as halogens, ethers, and esters.

Other embodiments relate to combinations of components. One embodimentrelates to compositions that include, as a first component, an activeingredient isolated or derived from an extract of hops and as a secondcomponent at least one member selected from the group consisting ofrosemary (Rosmarinus officinalis L.), an extract or compound derivedfrom rosemary, a triterpene species or derivatives or conjugatesthereof, a diterpene lactone species or derivatives or conjugatesthereof, and tryptanthrin or conjugates thereof. Another embodimentrelates to compositions that include, as a first component, tryptanthrinor conjugates thereof and as a second component at least one memberselected from the group consisting of an active ingredient isolated orderived from an extract of hops, rosemary, an extract or compoundderived from rosemary, a triterpene species or derivatives or conjugatesthereof, and a diterpene lactone species or derivatives or conjugatesthereof.

Preferred compositions can inhibit the inducibility or activity ofCOX-2. Preferred compositions also can inhibit prostaglandin synthesisselectively in target cells. Preferred compositions also can inhibitinflammation response selectively in target cells.

The compositions have widespread applications. Preferred compositionscan be useful for treating conditions, such as cancer, autoimmunediseases, inflammatory diseases, neurological diseases. Preferredcompositions are also believed to be useful for treating conditions,such as HIV-1 infections, rhinovirus infections, and cardiovasculardiseases.

Preferred compositions would be useful for, but not limited to, thetreatment of inflammation in a subject, and for treatment of otherinflammation-associated disorders, such as an analgesic in the treatmentof pain and headaches, or as an antipyretic for the treatment of fever.Preferred compositions would be useful to treat arthritis, including butnot limited to rheumatoid arthritis, spondyloathopathies, goutyarthritis, osteoarthritis, systemic lupus erythematosis, and juvenilearthritis.

Preferred compositions would be useful in the treatment of asthma,bronchitis, menstrual cramps, tendonitis, bursitis, and skin-relatedconditions such as psoriasis, eczema, burns and dermatitis. Preferredcompositions also would be useful to treat gastrointestinal conditionssuch as inflammatory bowel disease, Crohn's disease, gastritis,irritable bowel syndrome and ulcerative colitis and for the preventionor treatment of cancer such as colorectal cancer.

Further, preferred compositions would be useful in treating inflammationin such diseases as vascular diseases, migraine headaches, periarteritisnodosa, thyroiditis, aplastic anemia, Hodgkin's disease, sclerodma,rheumatic fever, type I diabetes, myasthenia gravis, multiple sclerosis,sacoidosis, nephrotic syndrome, Behchet's syndrome, polymyositis,gingivitis, hypersensitivity, swelling occurring after injury,myocardial ischemia, peridontal disease, fibromyalgia, atopicdermatitis, insulitis and the like.

Additionally, preferred compositions would also be useful in thetreatment of ophthalmic diseases, such as retinopathies, conjunctivitis,uveitis, ocular photophobia, and of acute injury to the eye tissue.Preferred compositions would also be useful in the treatment ofpulmonary inflammation, such as that associated with viral infectionsand cystic fibrosis.

Preferred compositions would also be useful for the treatment of certainnervous system disorders such as cortical dementias includingAlzheimer's disease. As inhibitors of COX-2 mediated biosynthesis ofPGE₂ in inflammatory cells, these compositions would also be useful inthe treatment of allergic rhinitis, respiratory distress syndrome,endotoxin shock syndrome, atherosclerosis, and central nervous systemdamage resulting from stroke, ischemia and trauma.

Preferred embodiments further provides a composition to increase therate at which glucosamine or chondrotin sulfate function to normalizejoint movement or reduce the symptoms of osteoarthritis.

Preferred embodiments also provide for methods of identifyingcompositions that would specifically inhibit or prevent the synthesis ofprostaglandins by COX-2 in inflammatory cells with little or no effecton PGE₂ synthesis in gastric mucosal cells.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

FIG. 1 depicts the induction of cyclooxygenase-2 and the metabolism ofarachidonic acid to prostaglandins and other eicosanoids by thecyclooxygenase enzymes. The action of non-steroidal anti-inflammatoryagents is through direct inhibition of the cyclooxygenase enzymes.

FIG. 2 shows an outline of fractions and compounds that can be obtainedfrom hops.

FIG. 3 illustrates [A] the alpha-acid genus (AA) and representativespecies humulone (R=—CH₂CH(CH₃)₂), cohumulone (R═, —CH(CH₃)₂), andadhumulone (R=—CH(CH₃)CH₂CH₃); [B] the isoalpha acid genus (IAA) andrepresentative species isohumulone (R=—CH₂CH(CH₃)₂), isocohumulone (R═,—CH(CH₃)₂), and isoadhumulone (R=—CH(CH₃)CH₂CH₃); [C] the reducedisomerized isoalpha acid genus (RIAA) and representative speciesdihydro-isohumulone (R=—CH₂CH(CH₃)₂) dihydro-isocohumulone (R═,—CH(CH₃)₂), and dihydro-adhumulone (R=—CH(CH₃)CH₂CH₃); [D] thetetra-hydroisoalpha acid genus (THIAA) and representative speciestetra-hydro-isohumulone (R=—CH₂CH(CH₃)₂), tetra-hydro-isocohumulone((R═, —CH(CH₃)₂), and tetra-hydro-adhumulone (R=—CH(CH₃)CH₂CH₃); [E] andthe hexa-hydroisoalpha acid (HHIAA) genus with representative specieshexa-hydro-isohumulone (R=—CH₂CH(CH₃)₂) hexa-hydro-isocohumulone (R═,—CH(CH₃)₂), and hexa-hydro-adhumulone (R=—CH(CH₃)CH₂CH₃).

FIG. 4 illustrates the chemical structure of tryptanthrin.

FIG. 5 illustrate the general chemical structures of the triterpenegenus [A] and ursolic acid [B] and oleanolic acid [C] as a specieswithin that genus.

FIG. 6 are representative immunoblots demonstrating constitutive COX-1and COX-2 expression in AGS human gastric mucosal cells. The AGS humangastric cell line was cultured in 6-well plates at 37° C. with 5% CO₂ ina humidified incubator for 24 hours. Cells were lysed on ice in lysisbuffer and protein concentration determined. Fifty μg of cell lysatewere solubilized, fractionated on a 10% polyacrylamide gel containingsodium dodecylsulfate (SDS), and transferred onto a nitrocellulosemembrane. The membranes were incubated in a blocking buffer and thenincubated with the respective primary antibody for 1 h at roomtemperature. Following primary antibody incubation, the blots werewashed three times with Tris-buffered saline and then incubated with thesecondary antibody for 1 h. Protein bands were visualized using enhancedchemiluminescence.

FIG. 7 [A] shows the percent inhibition of PGE₂ synthesis inLPS-stimulated RAW 264.7 cells by plasma samples from a human volunteerreceiving 880 mg t.i.d. of a test hops derivative formulation. Whitebars are means of raw data and dark bars are those means computed withthe elimination of outliers (never more than two of the eightreplicates). The gel capsules of the test formulation contained 200 mgreduced isomerized alpha-acids, 200 mg rosemary extract and 40 mgoleanolic acid. FIG. 7[B] is an estimate of the plasma concentrations oftest material at each post-dosing time capable of inhibiting PGE₂synthesis in LPS-stimulated RAW 264.7 cells assuming a constant 5:5:1ratio of components.

FIG. 8 illustrates the induction of PGE₂ synthesis by mite allergen inA549 pulmonary cells treated for 24 hours.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENT

The present invention relates to the discovery that that a supragenus ofcomponents isolated or derived from hops and other compounds result intissue-specific or cell-specific inhibition of COX-2 expression.Importantly, these compounds are not believed to directly inhibit COX-2or other enzymes with the prostaglandin synthesis pathway. Preferredembodiments provide compositions and methods for inhibiting COX-2expression, inhibiting prostanglandin synthesis selectively in targettissues or cells, or inhibiting inflammation response selectively intarget tissues or cells.

A preferred embodiment comprises compositions containing fractions orcompounds isolated or derived from hops. Examples of fractions isolatedor derived from hops are alpha acids, isoalpha acids, reduced isoalphaacids, tetra-hydroisoalpha acids, hexa-hydroisoalpha acids, beta acids,and spent hops. Preferred compounds of the fractions isolated or derivedfrom hops can be represented by a supragenus below:

wherein R′ is selected from the group consisting of carbonyl, hydroxyl,OR, and OCOR, wherein R is alkyl; wherein R″ is selected from the groupconsisting of CH(CH₃)₂, CH₂CH(CH₃)₂, and CH(CH₃)CH₂CH₃; and wherein R,T, X, and Z are independently selected from the group consisting of H,F, Cl, Br, I, and π orbital, with the proviso that if one of R, T, X, orZ is a π orbital, then the adjacent R, T, X, or Z is also a π orbital,thereby forming a double bond.

Other preferred compounds of the fractions isolated or derived from hopscan be represented by a genus below:

wherein R′ is selected from the group consisting of carbonyl, hydroxyl,OR, and OCOR, wherein R is alkyl; and wherein R″ is selected from thegroup consisting of CH(CH₃)₂, CH₂CH(CH₃)₂, and CH(CH₃)CH₂CH₃.

Other preferred compounds of the fractions isolated or derived from hopscan be represented by a genus below:

wherein R′ is selected from the group consisting of carbonyl, hydroxyl,OR, and OCOR, wherein R is alkyl; and wherein R″ is selected from thegroup consisting of CH(CH₃)₂, CH₂CH(CH₃)₂, and CH(CH₃)CH₂CH₃.

Examples of preferred compounds of an ingredient isolated or derivedfrom hops, include, but are not limited to, humulone, cohumulone,adhumulone, isohumulone, isocohumulone, isoadhumulone,dihydro-isohumulone, dihydro-isocohumulone, dihydro-adhumulone,tetrahydro-isohumulone, tetrahydro-isocohumulone, tetrahydro-adhumulone,hexahydro-isohumulone, hexahydro-isocohumulone, andhexahydro-adhumulone. The preferred compounds can bear substituents, asshown in the formula above.

Another embodiment comprises composition containing tryptanthrin andconjugates thereof.

Other embodiments relate to combinations of components. The preferredcompositions can function synergistically to specifically inhibit COX-2expression, to inhibit prostaglandin synthesis selectively in targetcells, or to inhibit inflammation response selectively in target cells.

One embodiment relates to compositions that include, as a firstcomponent, an active ingredient isolated or derived from an extract ofhops and as a second component at least one member selected from thegroup consisting of rosemary, an extract or compound derived fromrosemary, a triterpene species or derivatives or conjugates thereof, aditerpene lactone species or derivatives or conjugates thereof, andtryptanthrin or conjugates thereof. Another embodiment relates tocompositions that include, as a first component, tryptanthrin orconjugates thereof and as a second component at least one memberselected from the group consisting of an active ingredient isolated orderived from an extract of hops, rosemary, an extract or compoundderived from rosemary, a triterpene species or derivatives or conjugatesthereof, and a diterpene lactone species or derivatives or conjugatesthereof.

As used herein, the term “dietary supplement” refers to compositionsconsumed to affect structural or functional changes in physiology. Theterm “therapeutic composition” refers to any compounds administered totreat or prevent a disease.

As used herein, the term “effective amount” means an amount necessary toachieve a selected result. Such an amount can be readily determinedwithout undue experimentation by a person of ordinary skill in the art.

As used herein, the term “substantial” means being largely but notwholly that which is specified.

As used herein, the term “COX inhibitor” refers to a composition ofcompounds that is capable of inhibiting the activity or expression ofCOX-2 enzymes or is capable of inhibiting or reducing the severity,including pain and swelling, of a severe inflammatory response.

As used herein, the terms “derivatives” or a matter “derived” refer to achemical substance related structurally to another substance andtheoretically obtainable from it, i.e. a substance that can be made fromanother substance. Derivatives can include compounds obtained via achemical reaction.

As used herein, the term “inflammatory cell” refers to those cellularmembers of the immune system, for example B and T lymphocytes,neutrophils or macrophages involved in synthesis of prostaglandins inresponse to inflammatory signals such as interleukins, tumor necrosisfactor, bradykinin, histamine or bacterial-derived components.

As used herein, the term “target cells” refers to that cell populationin which the inhibition of PGE₂ or other prostaglandin synthesis isdesired, such as inflammatory cells, tumor cells, or pulmonary cells.Alternatively, “non-target cells” refers to that cell population inwhich the inhibition of PGE₂ or other prostaglandin synthesis is notdesired, such as the gastric mucosal, neural or renal cells.

As used herein, the term “hop extract” refers to the solid materialresulting from (1) exposing a hops plant product to a solvent, (2)separating the solvent from the hops plant products, and (3) eliminatingthe solvent.

As used herein, the term “solvent” refers to a liquid of aqueous ororganic nature possessing the necessary characteristics to extract solidmaterial from the hop plant product. Examples of solvents would include,but not limited to, water, steam, superheated water, methanol, ethanol,hexane, chloroform, liquid CO₂, liquid N₂ or any combinations of suchmaterials.

As used herein, the term “CO₂ extract” refers to the solid materialresulting from exposing a hops plant product to a liquid orsupercritical CO₂ preparation followed by removing the CO₂.

As used herein, the term “spent hops” refers to the solid andhydrophilic residue from extract of hops.

As used herein, the term “alpha acid” refers to compounds refers tocompounds collectively known as humulones and can be isolated from hopsplant products including, among others, humulone, cohumulone,adhumulone, hulupone, and isoprehumulone.

As used herein, the term “isoalpha acid” refers to compounds isolatedfrom hops plant products and subsequently have been isomerized. Theisomerization of alpha acids can occur thermally, such as boiling.Examples of isoalpha acids include, but are not limited to, isohumulone,isocohumulone, and isoadhumulone.

As used herein, the term “reduced isoalpha acid” refers to alpha acidsisolated from hops plant product and subsequently have been isomerizedand reduced, including cis and trans forms. Examples of reduced isoalphaacids (RIAA) include, but are not limited to, dihydro-isohumulone,dihydro-isocohumulone, and dihydro-adhumulone.

As used herein, the term “tetra-hydroisoalpha acid” refers to a certainclass of reduced isoalpha acid. Examples of tetra-hydroisoalpha acid(THIAA) include, but are not limited to, tetra-hydro-isohumulone,tetra-hydro-isocohumulone and tetra-hydro-adhumulone.

As used herein, the term “hexa-hydroisoalpha acid” refers to a certainclass of reduced isoalpha acid. Examples of hexa-hydroisoalpha acids(HHIAA) include, but are not limited to, hexa-hydro-isohumulone,hexa-hydro-isocohumulone and hexa-hydro-adhumulone.

As used herein, the term “beta-acid fraction” refers to compoundscollectively known as lupulones including, among others, lupulone,colupulone, adlupulone, tetrahydroisohumulone, and hexahydrocolupulone.

As used herein, the term “essential oil fraction” refers to a complexmixture of components including, among others, myrcene, humulene,beta-caryophyleen, undecane-2-on, and 2-methyl-but-3-en-ol.

As used herein, “conjugates” of compounds means compounds covalentlybound or conjugated to a member selected from the group consisting ofmono- or di-saccharides, amino acids, sulfates, succinate, acetate, andglutathione. Preferably, the mono- or di-saccharide is a member selectedfrom the group consisting of glucose, mannose, ribose, galactose,rhamnose, arabinose, maltose, and fructose.

As used herein, the term “fats” refers to triacylglyerol esters of fattyacids.

As used herein, the term “waxes” refers to triacylglycerol ethers of oresters of extremely long chain (>25 carbons) fatty alcohols or acids.

Hops

Hop extraction in one form or another goes back over 150 years to theearly nineteenth century when extraction in water and ethanol was firstattempted. Even today an ethanol extract is available in Europe, but byfar the predominant extracts are organic solvent extracts (hexane) andCO₂ extracts (supercritical and liquid). CO₂ (typically at 60 barspressure and 50 to 10° C.) is in a liquid state and is a relativelymild, non-polar solvent highly specific for hop soft resins and oils.Beyond the critical point, typically at 300 bars pressure and 60° C.,CO₂ has the properties of both a gas and a liquid and is a much strongersolvent. The composition of the various extracts is compared in Table 2.

TABLE 2 Hop Extracts (Percent W/W) Super-Critical Component Hops OrganicSolvent CO₂ Liquid CO₂ Total resins 12-20 15-60  75-90 70-95 Alpha-acids 2-12 8-45 27-55 30-60 Beta-acids  2-10 8-20 23-33 15-45 Essential oils0.5-1.5 0-5  1-5  2-10 Hard resins 2-4 2-10  5-11 None Tannins  4-100.5-5   0.1-5   None Waxes 1-5 1-20  4-13  0-10 Water  8-12 1-15 1-7 1-5

At its simplest, hop extraction involves milling, pelleting andre-milling the hops to spread the lupulin, passing a solvent through apacked column to collect the resin components and finally, removal ofthe solvent to yield a whole or “pure” resin extract.

The main organic extractants are strong solvents and in addition tovirtually all the lupulin components, they extract plant pigments,cuticular waxes, water and water-soluble materials.

Supercritical CO₂ is more selective than the organic solvents andextracts less of the tannins and waxes and less water and hencewater-soluble components. It does extract some of the plant pigmentslike chlorophyll but rather less than the organic solvents do. LiquidCO₂ is the most selective solvent used commercially for hops and henceproduces the most pure whole resin and oil extract. It extracts hardlythe hard resins or tannins, much lower levels of plant waxes, no plantpigments and less water and water-soluble materials.

As a consequence of this selectivity and the milder solvent properties,the absolute yield of liquid CO₂, extract per unit weight of hops isless than when using the other mentioned solvents. Additionally, theyield of alpha acids with liquid CO₂ (89-93%) is lower than that ofsupercritical CO₂ (91-94%) or the organic solvents (93-96%). Followingextraction there is the process of solvent removal, which for organicsolvents involves heating to cause volatilization. Despite this, traceamounts of solvent do remain in the extract. The removal of CO₂,however, simply involves a release of pressure to volatize the CO₂.

As shown in FIG. 2, hops CO₂ extracts can be fractionated intocomponents, including hops oils, beta acids, and alpha acids. Hops oilsinclude, but not limited to, humulene, beta-caryophyllene, mycrene,farnescene, gamrna-cadinene, alpha-selinene, and alpha-cadinene. Betaacids include, but are not limited to, lupulone, colupulone, adlupulone,tetrahydroisohumulone, and hexahydrocolupulone, collectively known aslupulones. Beta acids can be isomerized and reduced. Beta acids arereduced to give tetra-beta acids. Alpha acids include, but are notlimited to, humulone, cohumulone, adhumulone, hulupone, andisoprehumulone. Alpha acids can be isomerized to give isoalpha acids.Iso-alpha acids can be reduced to give reduced-isoalpha acids,tetra-hydroisoalpha acids, and hexa-hydroisoalpha acids.

A preferred embodiment comprises compositions containing fractions orcompounds isolated or derived from hops. Examples of fractions isolatedor derived from hops are alpha acids, isoalpha acids, reduced isoalphaacids, tetra-hydroisoalpha acids, hexa-hydroisoalpha acids, beta acids,and spent hops. Preferred compounds of the fractions isolated or derivedfrom hops can be represented by a supragenus below:

wherein R′ is selected from the group consisting of carbonyl, hydroxyl,OR, and OCOR, wherein R is alkyl; wherein R″ is selected from the groupconsisting of CH(CH₃)₂, CH₂CH(CH₃)₂, and CH(CH₃)CH₂CH₃; and wherein R,T, X, and Z are independently selected from the group consisting of H,F, Cl, Br, I, and π orbital, with the proviso that if one of R, T, X, orZ is a π orbital, then the adjacent R, T, X, or Z is also a π orbital,thereby forming a double bond.

Other preferred compounds of the fractions isolated or derived from hopscan be represented by a genus below:

wherein R′ is selected from the group consisting of carbonyl, hydroxyl,OR, and OCOR, wherein R is alkyl; and wherein R″ is selected from thegroup consisting of CH(CH₃)₂, CH₂CH(CH₃)₂, and CH(CH₃)CH₂CH₃.

Other preferred compounds of the fractions isolated or derived from hopscan be represented by a genus below:

wherein R′ is selected from the group consisting of carbonyl, hydroxyl,OR, and OCOR, wherein R is alkyl; and wherein R″ is selected from thegroup consisting of CH(CH₃)₂, CH₂CH(CH₃)₂, and CH(CH₃)CH₂CH₃.

As shown in FIG. 3, examples of preferred compounds of an ingredientisolated or derived from hops, include, but are not limited to,humulone, cohumulone, adhumulone, isohumulone, isocohumulone,isoadhumulone, dihydro-isohumulone, dihydro-isocohumulone,dihydro-adhumulone, tetrahydro-isohumulone, tetrahydro-isocohumulone,tetrahydro-adhumulone, hexahydro-isohumulone, hexahydro-isocohumulone,and hexahydro-adhumulone. The preferred compounds can bear substituents,as shown in the formula above.

The identification of humulone from hops extract as an inhibitor of boneresorption is reported in Tobe, H. et al. 1997. (Bone resorptionInhibitors from hop extract. Biosci. Biotech. Biochem 61(1)158-159.)Tobe et al. merely discloses the use of humulone, cohumulone,adhumulone, isohumulone, isocohumulone, and isoadhumulone for treatingosteoporosis. Later studies by the same group characterized themechanism of action of humulone as inhibition of COX-2 genetranscription following TNFalpha stimulation of MC3T3, E1 cells[Yamamoto, K. 2000. Suppression of cyclooxygenase-2 gene transcriptionby humulon of beer hop extract studied with reference to theglucocorticoid receptor. FEBS Letters 465:103-106]. The authorsconcluded that the action of humulone (also humulon) was similar to thatof glucocorticoids, but that humulone did not function through theglucocorticoid receptor. While these results establish that humuloneinhibits PGE₂ synthesis in MC3T3 cells (osteoblasts) at the gene level,one skilled in the art would not assume that these results wouldnecessarily occur in immune inflammatory cells or other cell lines.Example 5 herein demonstrates the high degree of tissue selectivity ofhops compounds and derivatives.

Preferred embodiments provide compositions and methods for inhibitingexpression of COX-2, inhibiting synthesis of prostaglandins selectivelyin target cells, and inhibiting inflammatory response selectively intarget cells. Preferred methods comprise a step of administering to amammal a composition of the preferred embodiments. Preferred embodimentscomprise a fraction isolated or derived from hops. A certain compositioncomprises alpha acids, isoalpha acids, reduced isoalpha acids,tetra-hydroisoalpha acids, hexa-hydroisoalpha acids, beta acids, orspent hops from hops extract or derivatives thereof. Preferred compoundsof the fractions isolated or derived from hops can be represented by asupragenus below:

wherein R′ is selected from the group consisting of carbonyl, hydroxyl,OR, and OCOR, wherein R is alkyl; wherein R″ is selected from the groupconsisting of CH(CH₃)₂, CH₂CH(CH₃)₂, and CH(CH₃)CH₂CH₃; and wherein R,T, X, and Z are independently selected from the group consisting of H,F, Cl, Br, I and π orbital, with the proviso that if one of R, T, X, orZ is a π orbital, then the adjacent R, T, X, or Z is also a π orbital,thereby forming a double bond. Other preferred compounds of thefractions isolated or derived from hops can be represented by a genusbelow:

wherein R′ is selected from the group consisting of carbonyl, hydroxyl,OR, and OCOR, wherein R is alkyl; and wherein R″ is selected from thegroup consisting of CH(CH₃)₂, CH₂CH(CH₃)₂, and CH(CH₃)CH₂CH₃. Otherpreferred compounds of the fractions isolated or derived from hops canbe represented by a genus below:

wherein R′ is selected from the group consisting of carbonyl, hydroxyl,OR, and OCOR, wherein R is alkyl; and wherein R″ is selected from thegroup consisting of CH(CH₃)₂, CH₂CH(CH₃)₂, and CH(CH₃)CH₂CH₃. Thepreferred embodiments contemplate compositions comprising beta acids orisomerized or reduced beta acids. Preferably, the alpha acid, isoalphaacid, reduced isoalpha acid, tetra-hydroisoalpha acid,hexa-hydroisoalpha acid, beta acid, or spent hops of the preferredembodiments is made from hops extract. More preferably, the alpha acid,isoalpha acid, reduced isoalpha acid, tetra-hydroisoalpha acid,hexa-hydroisoalpha acid, beta acid, or spent hops of the preferredembodiments is made from CO₂ extract of hops.

Tryptanthrin

Preferred embodiments can provide compositions and methods forinhibiting expression of COX-2, inhibiting synthesis of prostaglandinsselectively in target cells, and inhibiting inflammatory responseselectively in target cells. Preferred methods comprise a step ofadministering to a mammal a composition of the preferred embodiments. Acertain composition comprises tryptanthrin and conjugates thereof.

Depicted in FIG. 4, tryptanthrin is a natural compound found in certainherbs, such as Polygonum tinctorium and Isatis tinctoria. In traditionalChinese medicine this herb is known as Da Qing Ye or Qing Dai. The herbhas demonstrated antibacterial and antiviral activity. It hasantipyretic, anti-inflammatory and choleretic properties. Increasedphagocytic activity of leukocytes and relaxation of intestinal smoothmuscle are additional properties of Qing Dai.

Rosemary

Certain of preferred embodiments also include delivering an effectiveamount of rosemary, rosemary extract, or compounds derived from rosemarywith the fraction isolated or derived from hops or tryptanthrin.Preferred additions include, but are not limited to, rosemary, rosemaryextract, or those compounds known to be found in rosemary or extracts ofrosemary. These include 1,8-cineole, 19-alpha-hydroxyursolic acid,2-β-hydroxyoleanolicacid, 3-O-acetyloleanolic acid, 3-O-acetylursolicacid, 6-methoxy-luteolin-7-glucoside, 6-methoxyluteolin,6-methoxyluteolin-7-glucoside, methoxyluteolin-7-methylether,7-ethoxy-rosmanol, 7-methoxy-rosmanol, alpha-amyrin, alpha-humulene,alpha-hydroxyhydrocaffeic acid, alpha-pinene, alpha-terpinene,alpha-terpinenyl acetate, alpha-terpineol, alpha-thujone, apigenin,apigenin-7-glucoside, curcumene, benzyl-alcohol, β-amyrenone, β-amyrin,β-elemene, β-pinene, betulin**, betulinic acid**, borneol,bornyl-acetate, caffeic acid, camphene, camphor, carnosic acid**,carnosol**, carvacrol**, carvone, caryophyllene, caryophyllene-oxide,chlorogenic acid**, diosmetin**, gamma-terpinene, hesperidin,isoborneol, limonene*, luteolin*,luteolin-3′-O-(3″-O-acetyl)-β-D-glucuronide,luteolin-3′-O-(4″-O-acetyl)-β-D-glucuronide,luteolin-3′-O-β-D-glucuronide, luteolin-7-glucoside, methyl-eugenol,myrcene, neo-chlorogenic acid, nepetin, octanoic acid, oleanolic acid,p-cymene, piperitenone, rosmanol, rosmaric acid, rosmaricine,rosmaridiphenol, rosemarinic acid, rosmarinol, rosmariquinone, sabinene,sabinyl acetate, salicylates, salicylic acid-2-β-D-glucoside, squalene,terpinen-4-ol, terpinolene, thymol, trans-anethole, trans-carveol,ursolic acid, verbenone, and zingiberene. Of the species listed, thosecontaining at least one asterisk (*) are preferred and those containingtwo asterisks (**) are particularly preferred.

Triterpenes and Diterpene Lactones

Certain of preferred embodiments also include delivering an effectiveamount of a triterpene species or diterpene lactone species with thefraction isolated or derived from hops or tryptanthrin. Preferredtriterpenes include oleanolic acid, and ursolic acid. Both ursolic andoleanolic acid are found in a wide variety of botanicals. Diterpenelactones, such as andrographolide, can be obtained from Andrographispaniculata.

Diterpene lactone species, such as andrographolide, and triterpenes,such as ursolic acid and oleanolic acid, are commonly found in plantsand are used for their anti-inflammatory properties. Theanti-inflammatory effects of these compounds have been described in theliterature since 1960. Their mechanism of action is believed to be due(i) to the inhibition of histamine release from mast cells or (ii) tothe inhibition of lipoxygenase and cyclooxygenase activity therebyreducing the synthesis of inflammatory factors produced during thearachidonic acid cascade. Since andrographolide and oleanolic acid havebeen found to promote the healing of stomach ulcers, it is unlikely thatthe cyclooxygenase activity that is inhibited is COX-1. Also,andrographolide and oleanolic acid are potent antioxidants, capable ofinhibiting the generation of reactive oxygen intermediates and restoringtissue glutathione levels following stress.

For example, botanical sources for ursolic acid can be selected from thegroup consisting of Adina piluifera, Agrimonia eupatoria, Arbutus unedo,Arctostaphylos uva-ursi, Artocarpus heterophyllus, Catalpa bignoniodes,Catharanthus roseus, Chimaphila umbellata, Cornus florida, Cornusofficinalis, Crataegus cuneata, Crataegus laevigata, Crataeguspinnatifida, Cryptostegia grandifolia, Elaeagnus pungens, Eriobotryajaponica, Eucalyptus citriodora, Forsythia suspensa, Gaultheriafragrantissima, Glechoma hederacea, Hedyotis diffusa, Helichrysumangustifolium, Humulus lupulus, Hyssopus officinalis, Ilexparaguariensis, Lavandula angustifolia, Lavandula latifolia, Leonuruscardiaca, Ligustrum japonicum, Limonia acidissima, Lycopus europeus,Malus doinestica, Marubium vulgare, Melaleuca leucadendra, Melissaofficinalis, Mentha spicata, Mentha x rotundifolia, Monarda didyma,Nerium oleander, Ocimum basilicum, Ocimum basilicum, Ocimum basilicum,Ocimum baslicum, Ocimum canum, Origanum majorana, Origanum vulgare,Plantago asiatica, Plantago major, Plectranthus amboinicus, Prunellvulgaris, Prunella vulgaris, Prunus cerasus, Prunus laurocerasus, Prunuspersica, Prunus serotina spp serotina, Psidium guajava, Punica granatum,Pyrus communis, Rhododendron dauricum, Rhododendron ferrugineum,Rhododendron ponticum, Rosmarinus officinalis, Rubus fruticosus, Salviaofficinalis, Salvia sclarea, Salvia triloba, Sambucus nigra, Sanguisorbaofficinalis, Satureja hortensis, Satureja montana, Sorbus aucubaria,Syringa vulgaris, Teucrium chamaethys Teucrium polium, Teucrium spp,Thevetia peruviana, Thymus serpyllum, Thymus vulgaris, Uncariatomentosa, Vaccinium corymobosum, Vaccinium myrtillus, Vaccinium vitisidaea, Verbena officinalis, Viburnum opulus var. opulus, Viburnumprunifolium, Vinca minor and Zizyphus jujuba.

Similarly, oleanolic acid is found in Achyranthes aspera, Achyranthesbidentiata, Adina piluifera, Ajpocynum cannabinum, Akebia quinata,Allium cepa, Allium sativum, Arctostaphylos uva-ursi, Calendulaofficinalis, Catharanthus roseus, Centaurium erythraea, Chenopodiumalbum, Citrullus colocynthis, Cnicus benedictus, Cornus officinalis,Crataegus pinnatifida Cyperus rotundus, Daemonorops draco, Diospyroskaki, Elaeagnus pungens, Eleutherococcus senticosus, Eriobotryajaponica, Eugenia caryophyllata, Forsythia suspensa, Glechoma hederacea,Harpagophtum procumbens, Hedera helix, Hedyotis diffusa, Helianthusannuus, Hemsleys amabilis, Humulus lupulus, Hyssopus officinalis, Ilexrotunda, Lavandula latifolia, Leonurus cardiaca, Ligustrum japonicum,Ligustrum lucidum, Liquidambar orientalis, Liquidambar styraciflua,Loranthus parasiticus, Luffa aegyptiaca, Melaleuca leucadendra, Melissaofficinalis, Mentha spicata, Mentha x rotundifolia, Momordicacochinchinensis, Myristica fragrans, Myroxylon balsamum, Neriumoleander, Ocimum suave, Ociumum basilicum, Olea europaea, Origanummajorana, Origanum vulgare, Paederia scandens, Panax ginseng, Panaxjaponicus, Panax quinquefolius, Patrinia scabiosaefolia, Phytolaccaamericana, Plantago major, Plectranthus amboinicus, Prunella vulgaris,Prunus cerasus, Psidium guajava, Pulsatilla chinenisis, Quisqualisindica, Rosmarinus officinalis, Salvaia officinalis, Salvia sclarea,Salvia triloba, Sambucus nigra, Satureja hortensis, Satureja montana,Swertia chinensis, Swertia diluta, Swertia mileensis, Syzygiumaroniaticum, Thymus serpyllum, Thymus vulgaris, Trachycarpus fortunei,Uncaria tomentosa, Vaccinium corymbosum, Vaccinium myrtillus, Viburnumprunifolium, Viscum album, Vitis vinifera, or Zizyphus jujuba.

The preferred botanical sources for ursolic acid is a member selectedfrom the group consisting of Ligustrum japonicum, Plantago asiatica,Plantago major, Prunus species, Uncaria tomentosa, Zizyphus jujuba,Cornus officinalis, Eucalyptus citriodora, Forsythia suspensa, Lavandulalatifolia, Malus domestica, Nerium oleander, Ocimum baslicum, Punicagranatum, Pyrus communis, Rosmarinus officinalis, Salvia triloba, Sorbusaucubaria, Vaccinium myrtillus, Vaccinium vitis-idaea, and Viburnumopulus var. opulus. The most preferred botanical sources for ursolicacid is a member selected from the group consisting of Ligustrumjaponicum, Plantago asiatica, Plantago major, Prunus species, Uncariatomentosa, and Zizyphus jujuba.

The preferred botanical source for oleanolic acid is a member selectedfrom the group consisting of Eleutherococcus senticosus, Ligustrumjaponicum, Ligustrum lucidum, Panax ginseng, Panax japonicus, Panaxquinquefolius, Plantago major, Prunella vulgaris, Vitis vinifera,Zizyphus jujuba, Achyranthes bidentiata, Allium cepa, Allium sativum,Cornus officinalis, Daemonorops draco, Forsythia suspensa, Prunuscerasus, Quisqualis indica, Rosmarinus officinalis, Salvia triloba,Syzygium aromaticum, Thymus vulgaris, Uncaria tomentosa, Vacciniumcorymbosum, and Vaccinium myrtillus. The most preferred botanical sourcefor oleanolic acid is a member selected from the group consisting ofEleutherococcus senticosus, Ligustrum japonicum, Ligustrum lucidum,Panax ginseng, Panax japonicus, Panax quinquefolius, Plantago major,Prunella vulgaris Vitis vinifera and Zizyphus jujuba.

FIG. 5 illustrate the general chemical structures of the triterpenegenus and ursolic acid and oleanolic acid as a species within thatgenus. Representative terpenoids within the genus are18-a-glycyrrhetinic acid**, 18-β-glycyrrhetinic acid**,2-a-3-a-dihydrooxyurs-12-3n-28-onic acid*, 3-a-hydroxyursolic acid*,3-oxo-ursolic acid*, betulin**, betulinic acid**, celastrol*, eburicoicacid, friedelin*, glycyrrhizin, gypsogenin, oleanolic acid**, oleanolicacid-3-acetate, pachymic acid, pinicolic acid, sophoradiol,soyasapogenol A, soyasapogenol B, tripterin**, triptophenolide*,tumulosic acid, ursolic acid**, ursolic acid-3-acetate, uvaol*, andβ-sitosterol. Of the species listed, those containing at least oneasterisk (*) are preferred and those containing two asterisks (**) areparticularly preferred.

Examples of diterpene lactone species include, but is not limited to,andrographolide, dehydroandrographolide, deoxyandrographolide,neoandrographolide, selenoandrographolide, homoandrographolide,andrographan, amdrographon, andrographosterin,14-deoxy-11-oxoandrographolide, 14-deoxy-11,12-didehydroandrographolide, andrographiside, and edelin lactone.

Compositions and Synergistic Combinations

Preferred compositions can function to specifically inhibit COX-2expression, to inhibit prostaglandin synthesis selectively in targetcells, or to inhibit inflammation response selectively in target cells.Preferred embodiments include compositions containing fractions orcompounds isolated or derived from hops or compositions containingtryptanthrin and conjugates thereof.

A preferred embodiment comprises compositions containing fractions orcompounds isolated or derived from hops. Examples of fractions isolatedor derived from hops are alpha acids, isoalpha acids, reduced isoalphaacids, tetra-hydroisoalpha acids, hexa-hydroisoalpha acids, beta acids,and spent hops. Preferred compounds of the fractions isolated or derivedfrom hops can be represented by a supragenus below:

wherein R′ is selected from the group consisting of carbonyl, hydroxyl,OR, and OCOR, wherein R is alkyl; wherein R″ is selected from the groupconsisting of CH(CH₃)₂, CH₂CH(CH₃)₂, and CH(CH₃)CH₂CH₃; and wherein R,T, X, and Z are independently selected from the group consisting of H,F, Cl, Br, I and π orbital, with the proviso that if one of R, T, X, orZ is a π orbital, then the adjacent R, T, X, or Z is also a π orbital,thereby forming a double bond.

Other preferred compounds of the fractions isolated or derived from hopscan be represented by a genus below:

wherein R′ is selected from the group consisting of carbonyl, hydroxyl,OR, and OCOR, wherein R is alkyl; and wherein R″ is selected from thegroup consisting of CH(CH₃)₂, CH₂CH(CH₃)₂, and CH(CH₃)CH₂CH₃. Otherpreferred compounds of the fractions isolated or derived from hops canbe represented by a genus below:

wherein R′ is selected from the group consisting of carbonyl, hydroxyl,OR, and OCOR, wherein R is alkyl; and wherein R″ is selected from thegroup consisting of CH(CH₃)₂, CH₂CH(CH₃)₂, and CH(CH₃)CH₂CH₃.

Examples of preferred compounds of an ingredient isolated or derivedfrom hops, include, but are not limited to, humulone, cohumulone,adhumulone, isohumulone, isocohumulone, isoadhumulone,dihydro-isohumulone, dihydro-isocohumulone, dihydro-adhumulone,tetrahydro-isohumulone, tetrahydro-isocohumulone, tetrahydro-adhumulone,hexahydro-isohumulone, hexahydro-isocohumulone, andhexahydro-adhumulone. The preferred compounds can bear substituents, asshown in the formula above.

Another embodiment comprises composition containing tryptanthrin andconjugates thereof.

Other embodiments relate to combinations of components. Preferredcompositions can function synergistically to specifically inhibit COX-2expression, to inhibit prostaglandin synthesis selectively in targetcells, or to inhibit inflammation response selectively in target cells.

One embodiment relates to compositions that include, as a firstcomponent, an active ingredient isolated or derived from an extract ofhops and as a second component at least one member selected from thegroup consisting of rosemary, an extract or compound derived fromrosemary, a triterpene species or derivatives or conjugates thereof, aditerpene lactone species or derivatives or conjugates thereof, andtryptanthrin or conjugates thereof. Another embodiment relates tocompositions that include, as a first component, tryptanthrin orconjugates thereof and as a second component at least one memberselected from the group consisting of an active ingredient isolated orderived from an extract of hops, rosemary, an extract or compoundderived from rosemary, a triterpene species or derivatives or conjugatesthereof, a diterpene lactone species or derivatives or conjugatesthereof.

Dosage

The selected dosage level will depend upon activity of the particularcomposition, the route of administration, the severity of the conditionbeing treated or prevented, and the condition and prior medical historyof the patient being treated. However, it is within the skill of the artto start doses of the composition at levels lower than required toachieve the desired therapeutic effect and to gradually increase thedosage until the desired effect is achieved. If desired, the effectivedaily dose may be divided into multiple doses for purposes ofadministration, e.g., two to four separate doses per day. It will beunderstood, however, that the specific dose level for any particularpatient will depend upon a variety of factors including body weight,general health, diet, time and route of administration, combination withother compositions and the severity of the particular condition beingtreated or prevented.

Preferred embodiments include delivering an effective amount of hopsfractions, hops compounds, or hops derivatives alone or with incombination with other active ingredients. Preferably, a daily dose ofpreferred compositions would be formulated to deliver about 0.5 to10,000 mg of alpha acid, isoalpha acid, reduced isoalpha acid,tetra-hydroisoalpha acid, hexa-hydroisoalpha acid, beta acid, or spenthops per day. More preferably, an effective daily dose of preferredcompositions would be formulated to deliver about 50 to 7500 mg of alphaacids, isoalpha acid, reduced isoalpha acid, tetra-hydroisoalpha acid,hexa-hydroisoalpha acid, beta acid, or spent hops per day. Preferably,the effective daily dose is administered once or twice a day. A certainembodiment provides a composition comprising about 0.5 to 800 mg ofisoalpha acid or reduced isoalpha acid, more preferably about 50 to 400mg of isoalpha acid or reduced isoalpha acid per day. Another certainembodiment provides a composition comprising about 10 to 3000 mg ofreduced isoalpha acid, tetra-hydroisoalpha acid, or hexa-hydroisoalphaacid per day, more preferably about 50 to 2000 mg of reduced isoalphaacid, tetra-hydroisoalpha acid, or hexa-hydroisoalpha acid per day. Yetanother certain embodiment provides a composition comprising about 50 to7500 mg of spent hops per day, preferably about 100 to 6000 mg of spenthops per day.

Preferred embodiments include delivering an effective amount oftryptanthrin or conjugates thereof alone or with in combination withother active ingredients. Preferably, a daily dose of preferredcompositions would be formulated to deliver about 0.0005 to 50 mgtryptanthrin/kg body weight per day. More preferably, an effective dailydose of preferred compositions would be formulated to deliver about 0.01to 10 mg tryptanthrin/kg body weight per day. Preferably, a daily doseof preferred compositions would be formulated to deliver about 0.035 to3500 mg of tryptanthrin per day. More preferably, an effective dailydose of preferred composition would be formulated to deliver about 0.7to 700 mg of tryptanthrin per day. Preferably, the effective daily doseis administered once or twice a day.

Preferred embodiments include delivering an effective amount of rosemaryor an extract or compound derived from rosemary in combination withother active ingredients. Preferably, a daily dose of preferredcompositions would be formulated to deliver about 0.5 to 5000 mg ofrosemary, an extract of rosemary, or rosemary-derived compound per day.More preferably, an effective daily dose of preferred composition wouldbe formulated to deliver about 5 to 2000 mg of rosemary, an extract ofrosemary, or rosemary-derived compound per day. Preferably, theeffective daily dose is administered once or twice a day. A certainembodiment provides a composition comprising about 75 mg of rosemaryextract or rosemary-derived compound or derivative, to be administeredonce or twice a day.

Preferred embodiments include delivering an effective amount of atriterpene or diterpene lactone species or derivatives or conjugatesthereof in combination with other active ingredients. Preferably, adaily dose of preferred compositions would be formulated to deliverabout 0.0005 to 50 mg triterpene or diterpene lactone/kg body weight perday. More preferably, an effective daily dose of preferred compositionswould be formulated to deliver about 0.01 to 10 mg triterpene orditerpene lactone/kg body weight per day. Preferably, a daily dose ofpreferred compositions would be formulated to deliver about 0.035 to3500 mg of triterpene or diterpene lactone species per day. Morepreferably, an effective daily dose of preferred composition would beformulated to deliver about 0.7 to 700 mg of triterpene or diterpenelactone species per day. Preferably, the effective daily dose isadministered once or twice a day.

Preferably, an embodiment provides a composition containing an extractof rosemary and a triterpene, such as oleanolic acid, along with anactive ingredient, such as a fraction isolated or derived from hops ortryptanthrin or conjugate thereof. Preferably, an embodiment provides acomposition comprising about 0.01 to 500 mg of rosemary extract andabout 0.01 to 500 mg of oleanolic acid. Preferably, an embodimentprovides a composition capable of producing concentrations in targettissues of 0.1 to 10 μg/g tissue of rosemary extract and about 0.1 to 25μg/g tissue of oleanolic acid.

A composition of preferred embodiments for topical application wouldcontain about 0.001 to 10 weight percent, preferably about 0.1 to 1weight percent of a hops extract component or derivative or tryptanthrinor conjugate thereof. Preferred embodiments would produce serumconcentrations in the ranges of about 0.0001 to 10 μM, preferably about0.01 to 1 μM of a fraction isolated or derived from hops or tryptanthrinor conjugate thereof. The preferred embodiments for topical applicationcan further comprise an additional ingredient selected from rosemary, anextract or compound derived from rosemary, a triterpene species orderivatives or conjugates thereof, a diterpene lactone species orderivatives or conjugates thereof, a fraction isolated or derived fromhops or tryptanthrin or conjugates thereof, at concentrations of eachcomponent of 0.001 to 10 weight percent, preferably 0.1 to 1 weightpercent. Preferred embodiments would produce serum concentrations in theranges of about 0.001 to 50 μM, preferably about 0.1 μM to 5 μM of theadditional ingredient.

A certain composition comprises a first component selected from afraction isolated or derived from hops and a second component comprisingan extract or compound derived from rosemary, an extract or compoundderived from rosemary, a triterpene species or derivatives or conjugatesthereof, a diterpene lactone species or derivatives or conjugatesthereof, or tryptanthrin or conjugates thereof. Preferably, the weightratio of the first component, i.e. a fraction isolated or derived fromhops to the second component, i.e. an extract or compound derived fromrosemary, an extract or compound derived from rosemary, a triterpenespecies or derivatives or conjugates thereof, a diterpene lactonespecies or derivatives or conjugates thereof, or tryptanthrin orconjugates thereof, is within a range of about 100:1 to about 1:100;preferably about 50:1 to about 1:50; more preferably about 10:1 to about1:10.

A certain composition comprises a first component of tryptanthrin andconjugates thereof, and a second component comprising hops fraction,hops compound, hops derivative, rosemary, an extract or compound derivedfrom rosemary, a triterpene species or derivatives or conjugatesthereof, or a diterpene lactone species or derivatives or conjugatesthereof. Preferably, the weight ratio of the first component, i.e.tryptanthrin and conjugates thereof, to the second component, i.e. hopsfraction, hops compound, hops derivative, rosemary, an extract orcompound derived from rosemary, a triterpene species or derivatives orconjugates thereof, or a diterpene lactone species or derivatives orconjugates thereof, is within a range of about 100:1 to about 1:100;preferably about 50:1 to about 1:50; more preferably about 10:1 to about1:10; even more preferably about 1:1.

Applications of Preferred Compositions

As stated previously, the generally held concept (COX dogma) is thatCOX-1 is expressed constitutively in most tissues whereas COX-2 is theinducible enzyme triggered by pro-inflammatory stimuli includingmitogens, cytokines and bacterial lipopolysaccharide (LPS) in cells invitro and in inflamed sites in vivo. Based primarily on such differencesin expression, COX-1 has been characterized as a housekeeping enzyme andis thought to be involved in maintaining physiological functions such ascytoprotection of the gastric mucosa, regulation of renal blood flow,and control of platelet aggregation. COX-2 is considered to mainlymediate inflammation, although constitutive expression is found inbrain, kidney and the gastrointestinal tract. Therefore, it would bedesirable to down-regulate expression of COX-2 tissue-specifically orcell-specifically. Examples of target cells include, but are not limitedto, inflammatory cells, pulmonary cells, and tumor cells. Examples ofnontarget cells include, but are not limited to, gastric mucosal,neural, and renal cells.

The compositions have widespread applications. Preferred compositionscan be useful for treating conditions, such as cancer, autoimmunediseases, inflammatory diseases, neurological diseases. Preferredcompositions are also believed to be useful for treating conditions,such as HIV-1 infections, rhinovirus infections, and cardiovasculardiseases.

Preferred embodiments would be useful for, but not limited to a numberof inflammatory conditions. Thus, preferred embodiments includetreatment of inflammation in a subject, and treatment of otherinflammation-associated disorders, such as, as an analgesic in thetreatment of pain and headaches, or as an antipyretic for the treatmentof fever. Additional examples of such preferred embodiments would beuseful to treat arthritis, including but not limited to rheumatoidarthritis, spondyloathopathies, gouty arthritis, osteoarthritis,systemic lupus erythematosis, and juvenile arthritis. Such preferredembodiments would be useful in the treatment of asthma, bronchitis,menstrual cramps, tendonitis, bursitis, and skin related conditions suchas psoriasis, eczema, burns and dermatitis. Preferred embodiments alsowould be useful to treat gastrointestinal conditions such asinflammatory bowel disease, Crohn's disease, gastritis, irritable bowelsyndrome and ulcerative colitis and for the prevention or treatment ofcancer such as colorectal cancer. Preferred embodiments would be usefulin treating inflammation in such diseases as vascular diseases, migraineheadaches, periarteritis nodosa, thyroiditis, aplastic anemia, Hodgkin'sdisease, sclerodma, rheumatic fever, type I diabetes, myasthenia gravis,multiple sclerosis, sacoidosis, nephrotic syndrome, Behchet's syndrome,polymyositis, gingivitis, hypersensitivity, swelling occurring afterinjury, myocardial ischemia and the like.

Preferred embodiments would also be useful in the treatment ofophthalmic diseases, such as retinopathies, conjunctivitis, uveitis,ocular photophobia, and of acute injury to the eye tissue. Preferredembodiments would also be useful in the treatment of pulmonaryinflammation, such as that associated with viral infections and cysticfibrosis. Preferred embodiments would also be useful in the treatment ofasthma. Preferred embodiments would also be useful for the treatment ofcertain nervous system disorders such as cortical dementias includingAlzheimer's disease. Preferred embodiments are useful asanti-inflammatory agents, such as for the treatment of arthritis, withthe additional benefit of having significantly less harmful sideeffects. As inhibitors of COX-2 mediated biosynthesis of PGE₂, thesecompositions would also be useful in the treatment of allergic rhinitis,respiratory distress syndrome, endotoxin shock syndrome,atherosclerosis, and central nervous system damage resulting fromstroke, ischemia and trauma. The preferred embodiments would also beuseful for the treatment of fibromyalgia.

Since COX-2 can also play a role in the regulation of osteoblasticfunction, preferred embodiments can also be useful for treating andpreventing osteoporosis. Kanematsu et al. (J Bone Miner Res 1997November; 12(11):1789-96.) discloses that interleukin 1 (IL-1) and tumornecrosis factor alpha (TNF-alpha) have been implicated in thepathogenesis of osteoporosis. These proinflammatory cytokines induceboth COX-2 and nitric oxide synthase (iNOS) with the release of PGE₂ andNO, respectively. They determined the interaction between COX and NOSpathways and their role in the regulation of osteoblastic function inMC3T3-E1 cells.

According to preferred embodiments, the animal may be a member selectedfrom the group consisting of humans, non-human primates, dogs, cats,birds, horses, ruminants or other warm blooded animals. Preferredembodiments are directed primarily to the treatment of human beings.Administration can be by any method available to the skilled artisan,for example, by oral, topical, transdermal, transmucosal, or parenteralroutes.

Besides being useful for human treatment, preferred embodiments are alsouseful for treatment of other animals, including horses, dogs, cats,birds, sheep, pigs, etc. A certain formulation for the treatment ofinflammation would inhibit the induction and activity of COX-2 withlittle effect on the synthesis of PGE₂ in the gastric mucosa.Historically, the NSAIDs used for treatment of inflammation lacked thespecificity of inhibiting COX-2 without affecting PGE₂ synthesis ingastric mucosal cells. Therefore, these drugs irritated and damaged thegastrointestinal system when used for extended periods.

Formulations

Preferred compositions can be administered in the form of a dietarysupplement or therapeutic composition. The compositions may beadministered orally, topically, transdermally, transmucosally,parenterally, etc., in appropriate dosage units, as desired.

Preferred compositions for dietary application may include variousadditives such as other natural components of intermediary metabolism,vitamins and minerals, as well as inert ingredients such as talc andmagnesium stearate that are standard excipients in the manufacture oftablets and capsules. For example, one embodiment comprises activeingredients of preferred compositions in combination with glucosamine orchondrotin sulfate.

As used herein, “pharmaceutically acceptable carrier” includes any andall solvents, dispersion media, coatings, isotonic and absorptiondelaying agents, sweeteners and the like. These pharmaceuticallyacceptable carriers may be prepared from a wide range of materialsincluding, but not limited to, diluents, binders and adhesives,lubricants, disintegrants, coloring agents, bulking agents, flavoringagents, sweetening agents and miscellaneous materials such as buffersand absorbents that may be needed in order to prepare a particulartherapeutic composition. The use of such media and agents forpharmaceutically active substances is well known in the art. Exceptinsofar as any conventional media or agent is incompatible with theactive ingredients, its use in preferred compositions is contemplated.In one embodiment, talc, and magnesium stearate are included in theformulation. Other ingredients known to affect the manufacture of thiscomposition as a dietary bar or functional food can include flavorings,sugars, amino-sugars, proteins and/or modified starches, as well as fatsand oils.

Dietary supplements, lotions or therapeutic compositions of preferredembodiments can be formulated in any manner known by one of skill in theart. In one embodiment, the composition is formulated into a capsule ortablet using techniques available to one of skill in the art. In capsuleor tablet form, the recommended daily dose for an adult human or animalwould preferably be contained in one to six capsules or tablets.However, preferred compositions can also be formulated in otherconvenient forms, such as an injectable solution or suspension, a spraysolution or suspension, a lotion, gum, lozenge, food or snack item.Food, snack, gum or lozenge items can include any ingestible ingredient,including sweeteners, flavorings, oils, starches, proteins, fruits orfruit extracts, vegetables or vegetable extracts, grains, animal fats orproteins. Thus, preferred compositions can be formulated into cereals,snack items such as chips, bars, gumdrops, chewable candies or slowlydissolving lozenges. Preferred embodiments contemplate treatment of alltypes of inflammation-based diseases, both acute and chronic. Preferredformulations reduce the inflammatory response and thereby promoteshealing of, or prevents further damage to, the affected tissue. Apharmaceutically acceptable carrier can also be used in the preferredcompositions and formulations.

Assay Using AGS Cell Line

The Kuhrts patent application referenced previously attempts to identifytherapeutic components based on the Modified Whole Blood/Cell Assay ofT. D. Warner et al., Nonsteroid drug selectivities for cyclooxygenase-1rather than cyclooxygenase-2 are associated with human gastrointestinaltoxicity: A full in vitro analysis, Proc. Natl. Sci. USA 96:7563-68(1999) in paragraph [0046]. When tested according to this procedure,hops extracts do not yield IC₅₀ values in the necessary μg/mL range,since they are not direct inhibitors of COX-2. This lack of directinhibition of COX-2 was demonstrated by Tobe, H. et al. 1997. (Boneresorption Inhibitors from hop extract. Biosci. Biotech. Biochem61(1)158-159) using purified COX-2 enzyme. Similarly, EXAMPLE 4 of thisapplication demonstrates that, when tested according to the ModifiedWhole Blood/Cell Assay, hops compounds and derivatives produce medianinhibitory concentrations greater than 25 μg/mL. Such high medianinhibitory concentrations are pharmacologically unsuitable. Therefore,the Modified Whole Blood Assay as described by Warner is an invalidprocedure for formulating potentially therapeutically effectivecombinations containing hops or hops derivatives.

The discovery of COX-2 has made possible the design of drugs that reduceinflammation without removing the protective PGs in the stomach andkidney made by COX-1. One of our approaches is to screen compositions ofthe preferred embodiments using in vitro animal cells to assess COX-2and COX-1 inhibitory activity employing PGE₂, which has cytoprotectiveactions and play a role in maintaining the integrity of thegastrointestinal mucosa, as an endpoint. Secondarily, different celltypes are used to confirm results. The screening process would indicatecompositions that have specific COX-2 activity and limited COX-1inhibition. Compositions of preferred embodiments can be tested in twocell types: 1) human pulmonary cells or other cell line to determine andidentify optimal amounts and ratios for compositions comprising morethan one component; and 2) human gastric epithelial cells (AGS cellline), a gastrointestinal tract cell line and a model system forassessing toxicity which is typically related to inhibition of COX-1which is required for wound healing (such as ulcers). Hence,compositions of preferred embodiments that can inhibit COX-2 or COX-2induction can be screened by selecting compositions that have low or noactivity in AGS cells and good activity in human pulmonary cells orother cell line.

The description below is of specific examples setting forth preferredembodiments and are not intended to limit the scope.

Example 1 AGS Gastric Mucosal Cells Constitutively Express BothCyclooxygenase-1 and Cyclooxygenase-2

Summary—This example demonstrates that the AGS human gastric mucosalcell line, possessing constitutive expression of COX-1 and COX-2, hasexcellent potential to serve as a model for assessing thegastrointestinal toxicity of cyclooxygenase-inhibiting compounds.

Equipment used in this example included: an OHAS Model #E01140analytical balance, a Form a Model #F1214 biosafety cabinet (Marietta,Ohio), various pipettes to deliver 0.1 to 100 μL (VWR, Rochester, N.Y.),a cell hand tally counter (VWR Catalog #23609-102, Rochester, N.Y.), aForm a Model #F3210 CO₂ incubator (Marietta, Ohio), a hemacytometer(Hausser Model #1492, Horsham, Pa.), a Leica Model #DM IL invertedmicroscope (Wetzlar, Germany), a PURELAB Plus Water Polishing System(U.S. Filter, Lowell, Mass.), a 4° C. refrigerator (Form a Model #F3775,Marietta, Ohio), a vortex mixer (VWR Catalog #33994-306, Rochester,N.Y.), and a 37° C. water bath (Shel Lab Model #1203, Cornelius, Oreg.).

Chemicals and reagents—Prostaglandin E₂ EIA kit Monoclonal was purchasedfrom Cayman Chemical (Ann Arbor, Mich.). Anti-COX-1 and anti-COX-2rabbit polyclonal antisera were obtained from Upstate Biotechnology(CITY, NY); donkey anti-goat IgG-HRP was procured from Santa CruzBiotechnology (City, Calif.). Heat inactivated Fetal Bovine Serum(FBS-HI Cat. #35-011CV), and Dulbeco's Modification of Eagle's Medium(DMEM Cat #10-013CV) was purchased from Mediatech (Herndon, Va.). Allstandard reagents were obtained from Sigma (St. Louis, Mo.) and were thepurest commercially available.

Cell Culture—The human gastric mucosal cell line AGS was obtained fromthe American Type Culture Collection (Manassas, Va.) and sub-culturedaccording to the instructions of the supplier. The cells were routinelycultured at 37° C. with 5% CO₂ in RPMI 1640 containing 10% FBS, with 50units penicillin/mL, 50 μg streptomycin/mL, 5% sodium pyruvate, and 5%L-glutamine. Exponentially growing cells were seeded into 6-well platesand grown to confluence. A 20 μL aliquot of the supernatant media wassampled for determination of PGE₂ content. Cells were then washed inPBS, scraped and lysed for immunoblotting.

Protein assay—Protein concentrations of cell lysates were determinedusing the NanoOrange Protein Quantitation Kit with bovine serum albuminas the standard (Molecular Probes, Eugene, Oreg.) according to theprocedure supplied by the manufacturer. Fluorescence was determinedusing a Packard FluoroCount, Model BF 10000 fluorometer with theexcitation filter set at 485 nm and emission filter set at 570 nm usingPackard PlateReader version 3.0 software. The I-Smart program providedwith the Packard PlateReader was used to calculate the proteinconcentration.

Immunoblotting—Western blotting of COX-1 and COX-2 was performed usingPAGEr™ Gold Precast Gels (Bio Whittaker Molecular Applications(Rockland, Me.). AGS cell lysates containing approximately 60 μg proteinwere loaded with Laemmli Sample Buffer into the wells of the gel in atotal volume of 30 μL. The vertical minigel electrophoresis chamberswere made by Savant Instruments Inc. (Holbrook, N.Y.), model MV 120.Gels were run at 40 mA/plate (constant current) at room temperatureuntil the bromophenol blue stain reached the bottom of the gel, aboutone h. Gels were then blotted on the polyvinyl fluoride transfermembranes (Pall Corporation, Ann Arbor, Mich.), overnight, at 500 mA and4° C. Precision Protein Standard molecular weight markers, unstained,broad range (BioRad, Hercules, Calif.) were used. The BioWest™ Extendedduration chemiluminescent substrate, a non-isotopic, horseradishperoxidase substrate kit for Western blot detection (BioImaging Systems,Upland, Calif.) was used for protein visualization. Images of westernblots were acquired using a UVP Epi Chemi II Darkroom (BioImagingSystems), analyzed and enhanced by LabWorks™ Image Acquisition andAnalysis Software (BioImaging Systems).

PGE₂ assay—A commercial, non-radioactive procedure for quantification ofPGE₂ was employed (Caymen Chemical, Ann Arbor, Mich.) and therecommended procedure of the manufacturer was used without modification.Briefly, 25 μL of the medium, along with a serial dilution of PGE₂standard samples, were mixed with appropriate amounts ofacetylcholinesterase-labeled tracer and PGE₂ antiserum, and incubated atroom temperature for 18 h. After the wells were emptied and rinsed withwash buffer, 200 μL of Ellman's reagent containing substrate foracetylcholinesterase were added. The reaction was carried out on a slowshaker at room temperature for 1 h and the absorbance at 415 nm wasdetermined. The PGE₂ concentration was represented as picograms per 10⁵cells.

Results—As seen in FIG. 6, the AGS cell line constitutively expressesboth COX-1 and COX-2, with COX-1 expression approximately 4-timesgreater than COX-2 expression. PGE₂ synthesis in AGS cells over 18 h was660 pg/10⁵ cells. Thus, this example demonstrates that the AGS humangastric mucosal cell line, possessing constitutive expression of COX-1and COX-2, has excellent potential to serve as a model for assessing thegastrointestinal toxicity of cyclooxygenase-inhibiting compounds.

In the past, the classical COX-2 hypothesis has downplayed the role ofCOX-2 expression in the gastrointestinal mucosa. While in normal gastricmucosa COX-1 is the predominant COX isozyme, as demonstrated in thisexample and in the literature, there is increasing evidence thatdetectable amount of COX-2 mRNA and protein are both constitutivelyexpressed and inducible in specific locations of the gastric mucosa inboth animals and humans [Halter, F., et al. (2001) Cyclooxygenase2-implications on maintenance of gastric mucosal integrity and ulcerhealing: controversial issues and perspectives. Gut 49, 443-453]. Recentstudies in rats have shown that whereas selective inhibition of COX-1 orCOX-2 is not ulcerogenic, combined inhibition of both COX-1 and COX-2induces severe lesions in the stomach and small intestine comparablewith the effects of NSAID such as indomethacin. This observationsuggests an important contribution of COX-2 to the maintenance ofgastrointestinal mucosal integrity.

Example 2 Inhibition of PGE₂ Synthesis in Gastric Mucosal Cells byNonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs

Summary—This example illustrates that inhibition of PGE₂ synthesis inAGS gastric cells by NSAIDs correlates with their observed clinicalgastric irritation.

Chemicals—Rofecoxib and celexocib were obtained. Diisofluorophosphate(DIFP), nimensulide, ibuprofen, salicylic acid, aspirin, indomethacinand acetaminophen were purchased from Sigma (St. Louis, Mo.). All otherchemicals were obtained from suppliers as described in Example 1.

Cells—A549 (human pulmonary epithelial) and AGS cells (human gastricmucosa) were obtained from the American Type Culture Collection(Manassas, Va.) and sub-cultured according to the instructions of thesupplier. The cells were routinely cultured at 37° C. with 5% CO₂ inRPMI 1640 containing 10% FBS, with 50 units penicillin/mL, 50 μgstreptomycin/mL, 5% sodium pyruvate, and 5% L-glutamine. On the day ofthe experiments, exponentially growing cells were harvested and washedwith serum-free RPMI 1640.

The log phase A549 and AGS cells were plated at 8×10⁴ cells per well in0.2 mL growth medium per well in a 96-well tissue culture plate. For thedetermination of PGE₂ inhibition by the test compounds in A549 cells,the procedure of Warner et al., also known as the WHMA-COX-2 protocol[Warner, T. D., et al. (1999) Nonsteroid drug selectivities forcyclo-oxygenase-1 rather than cyclo-oxygenase-2 are associated withhuman gastrointestinal toxicity: a full in vitro analysis. Proc NatlAcad Sci USA 96, 7563-7568.] was followed with no modifications.Briefly, 24 hours after plating of the A549 cells, interleukin-1β (10ng/mL) was added to induce the expression of COX-2. After 24 hr, thecells were washed with serum-free RPMI 1640 and the test materials,dissolved in DMSO and serum-free RPMI, were added to the wells toachieve final concentrations of 25, 5.0, 0.5 and 0.05 μg/mL. Eachconcentration was run in duplicate. DMSO was added to the control wellsin an equal volume to that contained in the test wells. Sixty minuteslater, A23187 (50 μM) was added to the wells to release arachidonicacid. Twenty-five μL of media were sampled from the wells 30 minuteslater for PGE₂ determination.

Non-stimulated AGS cells were used in these studies. Twenty-four hoursafter plating in the 96-well microtiter plates, the cells were washedwith serum-free RPMI 1640 and the test materials, dissolved in DMSO andserum-free RPMI, were added to the wells to achieve final concentrationsof 25, 5.0, 0.5 and 0.05 μg/mL. Each concentration was run in duplicate.DMSO was added to the control wells in an equal volume to that containedin the test wells. Sixty minutes later, arachidonic acid was added tothe wells to achieve a final concentration of 100 μM. Twenty-five μL ofmedia were sampled from the wells 30 minutes after the addition ofarachidonic acid for PGE₂ determination.

Cell viability—Cell viability was assessed by a3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide (MTT)-basedcolorimetric assay (Sigma, St. Louis, Mo.). The MTT solution was addeddirectly to the wells after sampling for PGE₂ determination. Theabsorbance of each well was read at 580 nm using an ELISA plate reader.No toxicity was observed at the highest concentrations tested for any ofthe compounds.

Calculations—The median inhibitory concentration (IC₅₀) for PGE₂synthesis was calculated using CalcuSyn (BIOSOFT, Ferguson, Mo.). Thisstatistical package performs multiple drug dose-effect calculationsusing the median effect methods described by T-C Chou and P. Talaly[(1984) Quantitative analysis of dose-effect relationships: the combinedeffects of multiple drugs or enzyme inhibitors. Adv Enzyme Regul 22,27-55.] hereby incorporated by reference.

Briefly, the analysis correlates the “Dose” and the “Effect” in thesimplest possible form: fa/fu=(C/C_(m))^(m), where C is theconcentration or dose of the compound and Cm is the median-effectivedose signifying the potency. Cm is determined from the x-intercept ofthe median-effect plot. The fraction affected by the concentration ofthe test material is fa and the fraction unaffected by the concentrationis fu (fu=1−fa). The exponent m is the parameter signifying thesigmoidicity or shape of the dose-effect curve. It is estimated by theslope of the median-effect plot.

The median-effect plot is a graph of x=log(C) vs y=log(fa/fu) and isbased on the logarithmic form of Chou's median-effect equation. Thegoodness of fit for the data to the median-effect equation isrepresented by the linear correlation coefficient r of the median-effectplot. Usually, the experimental data from enzyme or receptor systemshave an r>0.96, from tissue culture an r>0.90 and from animal systems anr>0.85. In the cell-based studies reported here, all linear correlationcoefficients were greater than 0.90. Experiments were repeated threetimes on three different dates. The percent inhibition at each dose wasaveraged over the three independent experiments and used to calculatethe median inhibitory concentrations reported.

Results—The highly specific COX-2 inhibitor diisofluorophosphateexhibited a median inhibitory concentration in A549 cells of 1.19 μg/mLand did not inhibit PGE₂ synthesis in AGS cells at the highestconcentration tested of 25 μg/mL (Table 3). Rofecoxib, and celexocib,selective COX-2 drugs, were 27-, and 14-times, respectively, more potentinhibitors of PGE₂ synthesis in the target A549 cells than in thenon-target AGS gastric mucosal cells. This finding demonstrates not onlyCOX-2 selectivity, but also target-tissue selectivity consistent withtheir low gastrointestinal toxicity. Nimensulide, another new, selectiveCOX-2 inhibitor was equally as potent in the inhibition of PGE₂synthesis in both cell lines. The anti-inflammatory agent acetaminophen,purported to inhibit an unidentified isozyme of COX (COX-3) and havinglow gastrointestinal toxicity, inhibited PGE₂ biosynthesis in A549 cellsbut had no effect on PGE₂ synthesis in AGS gastric mucosal cells.

Alternatively and consistent with their demonstrated clinical gastrictoxicity, ibuprofen, aspirin and indomethacin all exhibited moreinhibition of PGE₂ synthesis in the AGS cell line than in the targetA549 cells. Salicylic acid, an anti-inflammatory agent that inhibits theexpression of COX-2 with little gastric irritation, was inactive in bothcell models.

TABLE 3 Median inhibitory concentrations for test compounds in the A549and AGS cell lines. IC₅₀ A549 IC₅₀ AGS Compound [μg/mL] [μg/mL] IC₅₀AGS/IC₅₀ A549 Diisofluorophosphate 1.19 >25 >21 Rofecoxib 0.081 2.2127.3 Celexocib 0.004 0.055 13.8 Nimensulide 0.10 0.11 1.0 Ibuprofen 0.100.05 0.50 Aspirin 0.48 0.09 0.19 Indomethacin 0.033 0.002 0.002Salicylic acid >25 >25 >1 Acetaminophen 0.607 >25 >41

These results validate the use of the AGS gastric mucosal cell line toevaluate potential gastrointestinal toxicity of anti-inflammatory agentscapable of inhibiting the synthesis of PGE₂. They also demonstratecellular specificity in the action of COX-inhibiting compounds. A ratioof 1 for IC₅₀ AGS/IC₅₀ A549 indicates IC₅₀s that are the same for boththe AGS cell and A549 cells. If the ratio is higher than 1 for IC₅₀AGS/IC₅₀ A549, then the inhibition of PGE₂ is lower for the AGS cells. Alower inhibition of PGE₂ in AGS cells is favorable because AGS cell lineexpresses more COX-1, which maintains mucosal homeostasis.

Example 3 Inhibition of PGE₂ Synthesis in Stimulated and NonstimulatedMacrophages by Hops (Humulus lupulus) Compounds and Derviatives

Summary—This example illustrates the potency of hops fractions andderivatives to inhibit COX-2 synthesis of PGE₂ preferentially over COX-1synthesis of PGE₂ in the murine macrophage model.

Chemicals and reagents—Bacterial lipopolysaccharide (LPS; B E. coli055:B5) was from Sigma (St. Louis, Mo.). Hops fractions (1) alpha hop(1% alpha acids; AA), (2) aromahop OE (10% beta acids and 2% isomerizedalpha acids, (3) isohop (isomerized alpha acids; IAA), (4) beta acidsolution (beta acids BA), (5) hexahop gold (hexahydro isomerized alphaacids; HHIAA), (6) redihop (reduced isomerized-alpha acids; RIAA), (7)tetrahop (tetrahydro-iso-alpha acids THIAA) and (8) spent hops wereobtained from Betatech Hops Products (Washington, D.C., U.S.A.). Thespent hops were extracted two times with equal volumes of absoluteethanol. The ethanol was removed by heating at 40° C. until a only thickbrown residue remained. This residue was dissolved in DMSO for testingin RAW 264.7 cells. Unless otherwise noted, all standard reagents wereobtained from Sigma (St. Louis, Mo.) and were the purest commerciallyavailable. All other chemicals and equipment were as described inExamples 1 and 2.

Cell culture—RAW 264.7 cells, obtained from American Type CultureCollection (Catalog #TIB-71, Manassas, Va.), were grown in Dulbecco'sModification of Eagle's Medium (DMEM, Mediatech, Herndon, Va.) andmaintained in log phase. The DMEM growth medium was made by adding 50 mLof heat inactivated FBS and 5 mL of penicillin/streptomycin to a 500 mLbottle of DMEM and storing at 4° C. The growth medium was warmed to 37°C. in water bath before use.

On day one of the experiment, the log phase RAW 264.7 cells were platedat 8×10⁴ cells per well in 0.2 mL growth medium per well in a 96-welltissue culture plate in the morning. At the end of the day one (6 to 8 hpost plating), 100 μL of growth medium from each well were removed andreplaced with 100 μL fresh medium.

A 1.0 mg/mL stock solution of LPS, used to induce the expression ofCOX-2 in the RAW 264.7 cells, was prepared by dissolving 1.0 mg of LPSin 1 mL DMSO. It was vortexed until dissolved and stored at 4° C. Beforeuse, it was melted at room temperature or in a 37° C. water bath.

On day two of the experiment, test materials were prepared as 1000×stock in DMSO. In 1.7 mL microfuge tubes, 1 mL DMEM without FBS wasadded for test concentrations of 0.05, 0.10, 0.5, and 1.0 μg/mL. Two μLof the 1000×DMSO stock of the test material was added to the 1 mL ofmedium without FBS. The tube contained the final concentration of thetest material concentrated 2-fold and the tube placed in an incubatorfor 10 minutes to equilibrate to 37° C.

For COX-2 associated PGE₂ synthesis, 100 μl of medium were removed fromeach well of the cell plates prepared on day one and replaced with 100μL of equilibrated 2× final concentration of the test compounds. Cellswere then incubated for 90 minutes. Twenty μL of LPS were added to eachwell of cells to be stimulated to achieve a final concentration of 1 μgLPS/mL and the cells were incubated for 4 h. The cells were furtherincubated with 5 μM arachidonic acid for 15 minutes. Twenty-five μL ofsupernatant medium from each well was transferred to a clean microfugetube for the determination of PGE₂ released into the medium.

Following the LPS stimulation, the appearance of the cells was observedand viability was determined as described in Example 2. No toxicity wasobserved at the highest concentrations tested for any of the compounds.Twenty-five μL of supernatant medium from each well was transferred to aclean microfuge tube for the determination of PGE₂ released into themedium. PGE₂ was determined and reported as previously described inExample 1.

For COX-1 associated PGE₂ synthesis, 100 μL of medium were removed fromeach well of the cell plates prepared on day one and replaced with 100μL of equilibrated 2× final concentration of the test compounds. Cellswere then incubated for 90 minutes. Next, instead of LPS stimulation,the cells were incubated with 100 μM arachidonic acid for 15 minutes.Twenty-five μL of supernatant medium from each well was transferred to aclean microfuge tube for the determination of PGE₂ released into themedium. The appearance of the cells was observed and viability wasdetermined as described in Example 2. No toxicity was observed at thehighest concentrations tested for any of the compounds. Twenty-five μLof supernatant medium from each well was transferred to a cleanmicrofuge tube for the determination of PGE₂ released into the medium.PGE₂ was determined and reported as previously described in Example 1.The median inhibitory concentrations (IC₅₀) for PGE₂ synthesis from bothCOX-2 and COX-1 were calculated as described in Example 2.

TABLE 4 COX-2 and COX-1 inhibition in RAW 264.7 cells by hop fractionsand derviatives COX-2 COX-1 IC₅₀ IC₅₀ Test Material [μg/mL] [μg/mL]COX-1/COX-2 Alpha hop (AA) 0.21 6.2 30 Aromahop OE 1.6 4.1 2.6 Isohop(IAA) 0.13 18 144 Beta acids (BA) 0.54 29 54 Hexahop (HHIAA) 0.29 3.0 11Redihop (RIAA) 0.34 29 87 Tetrahop (THIAA) 0.20 4.0 21 Spent hops (EtOH)0.88 21 24

As seen in Table 4, all hops fractions and derivative selectivelyinhibited COX-2 over COX-1 in this target macrophage model. This was anovel and unexpected finding. The extent of COX-2 selectivity for thehops derivatives IAA and RIAA, respectively, 144- and 87-fold, wasunanticipated. Such high COX-2 selectivity combined with low medianinhibitory concentrations, has not been previously reported for naturalproducts from other sources.

Example 4 Hops Compounds and Derivatives are not Direct CyclooxygenaseEnzyme Inhibitors

Summary—This example illustrates that hops compounds and derivatives donot inhibit PGE₂ synthesis in A549 pulmonary epithelial cells atphysiologically relevant concentrations when tested using the WHMA-COX-2protocol.

Chemicals—Hops and hops derivatives used in this example were previouslydescribed in Example 3. All other chemicals were obtained from suppliersas described in Examples 1 and 2.

Cells—A549 (human pulmonary epithelial) Cells were obtained from theAmerican Type Culture Collection (Manassas, Va.) and sub-culturedaccording to the instructions of the supplier. The cells were routinelycultured at 37° C. with 5% CO₂ in RPMI 1640 containing 10% FBS, with 50units penicillin/mL, 50 μg streptomycin/mL, 5% sodium pyruvate, and 5%L-glutamine. On the day of the experiments, exponentially growing cellswere harvested and washed with serum-free RPMI 1640.

Log phase A549 cells were plated at 8×10⁴ cells per well with 0.2 mLgrowth medium per well in a 96-well tissue culture plate. For thedetermination of PGE₂ inhibition by the test compounds, the procedure ofWarner et al. [(1999) Nonsteroid drug selectivities forcyclo-oxygenase-1 rather than cyclo-oxygenase-2 are associated withhuman gastrointestinal toxicity: a full in vitro analysis. Proc NatlAcad Sci USA 96, 7563-7568], also known as the WHMA-COX-2 protocol wasfollowed with no modification. Briefly, 24 hours after plating of theA549 cells, interleukin-1β (10 ng/mL) was added to induce the expressionof COX-2. After 24 hr, the cells were washed with serum-free RPMI 1640and the test materials, dissolved in DMSO and serum-free RPMI, wereadded to the wells to achieve final concentrations of 25, 5.0, 0.5 and0.05 μg/mL. Each concentration was run in duplicate. DMSO was added tothe control wells in an equal volume to that contained in the testwells. Sixty minutes later, A23187 (50 μM) was added to the wells torelease arachidonic acid. Twenty-five μL of media were sampled from thewells 30 minutes later for PGE₂ determination.

Cell viability was assessed as previously described in Example 2. Notoxicity was observed at the highest concentrations tested for any ofthe compounds. PGE₂ in the supernatant medium was determined andreported as previously described in Example 1.

The median inhibitory concentration (IC₅₀) for PGE₂ synthesis wascalculated as previously described in Example 2.

Results—At the doses tested, the experimental protocol failed to capturea median effective concentration of any of the hops extracts orderivatives. Since the protocol requires the stimulation of COX-2expression prior to the addition of the test compounds, the likelyanswer to the failure of the test materials to inhibit PGE₂ synthesis isthat their mechanism of action is to inhibit the expression of the COX-2isozyme and not activity directly. While some direct inhibition can beobserved using the WHMA-COX-2 protocol, this procedure is inappropriatein evaluating the anti-inflammatory properties of hops compounds orderivatives of hops compounds.

Example 5 Lack of Inhibition of PGE₂ Synthesis in Gastric Mucosal Cellsby Hops (Humulus lupulus) Compounds and Derviatives

Summary—This example illustrates the lack of PGE₂ inhibition by hopsfractions and in the AGS human gastric mucosal cell line implying lowgastric irritancy potential of these compounds.

Chemicals and reagents were used as described in Example 3. AGS cellswere grown and used for testing hops compounds and derivatives asdescribed in Example 2. PGE₂ was determined and reported as previouslydescribed in Example 1. The median inhibitory concentrations (IC₅₀) forPGE₂ synthesis from AGS cells were calculated as described in Example 2.

TABLE 5 Lack of PGE₂ inhibition in AGS gastric mucosal cells by hopfractions and derviatives IC₅₀ AGS Test Material [μg/mL] Alpha hop(AA) >25 Aromahop OE >25 Isohop (IAA) >25 Beta acids (BA) >25 Hexahop(HHIAA) >25 Redihop (RIAA) >25 Tetrahop (THIAA) >25 Spent hops (EtOH)>25

As seen in Table 5, all hops fractions and derivatives were unable toinhibit PGE₂ synthesis by 50% or more at the highest concentrationstested in the AGS gastric mucosal cell line. Based on theanti-inflammatory potency exhibited by these fractions in targetmacrophages, this was a novel and unexpected finding.

Example 6 Inhibition of PGE₂ Synthesis by Rosemary Extract and CompoundsFound in Rosemary

Summary—This example illustrates the anti-inflammatory effect ofrosemary extract and compounds commonly found in rosemary, carnosicacid, ursolic acid and oleanolic acid in target cells and the effect ofrosemary extract and oleanolic acid on PGE₂ synthesis ingastrointestinal cells.

Equipment used, chemicals, cell handing and calculation of medianinhibitory concentrations were performed as previously described inExamples 1, 2 and 3. Carnosic acid, ursolic acid and oleanolic acid wereobtained from Sigma (St. Louis, Mo.). The rosemary extract was a hexaneextract obtained from selected leaves of Rosmarinus officinalis by mean(95%+/−3% rosemary extract) that complied with US regulation (21 CFR101-22). It was determined by HPLC analysis that the extract contained aminimum of 11% phenolic diterpenes (consisting of carnosic acid,carnosol, methyl carnosate, rosemadial, rosemarinic acid), 4.9% mincarnosic acid, and a minimum of 7.6% the sum of carnosol+carnosic acid.The carnosic acid was purchased from Sigma (St. Louis, Mo.) and theoleanolic acid (80%) was obtained from Sabinsa (121 Ethel Road West,Piscataway, N.J.).

TABLE 6 PGE₂ inhibition in RAW 264.7 and AGS cells by a rosemaryextract, carnosic acid, ursolic acid, and oleanolic acid. RAW 264.7 RAWor AGS IC₅₀ IC₅₀ COX-1/ Test Material (COX-2/COX-1)† [μg/mL] [μg/mL]COX-2 Rosemary extract (RAW/AGS) 0.51 4.0 7.8 Carnosic acid (RAW/RAW)0.50 231 470 Ursolic acid (RAW/RAW) 1.91 33 17 Oleanolic acid (RAW/RAW)1.15 19 17 Oleanolic acid (RAW/AGS) 1.15 5.0 4.3 †Indicates the celllines used to estimate inhibitor effects, respectively, on COX-2 orCOX-1 synthesis of PGE₂. In all cases, LPS-stimulated RAW 264.7 cellswere used to determine median inhibitory concentrations of COX-2mediated PGE₂ synthesis. For the estimation of the effects of testmaterials on COX-1-mediated synthesis, either non-stimulated RAW264.7 ornon-stimulated AGS cells were used.

Results—All test materials exhibited potent inhibition of PGE₂ synthesisin LPS-stimulated RAW 264.7 cells indicating inhibition of the COX-2isozyme (Table 6). Surprisingly, the rosemary extract was more potentthan ursolic and oleanolic acids and equal to pure carnosic acid inpotency with a median inhibitory concentration of 0.5 μg testmaterial/mL medium. Since the rosemary extract contained only 11%carnosic acid or derivative, the inference is that the interaction ofthe carnosic acid derivatives or the myriad of other compounds in therosemary extract were acting in concert or synergistically to providesuch a potent inhibition of COX-2. Alternatively, one of the compoundspreviously identified in rosemary and listed earlier has extremely highpotency for inhibiting COX-2 mediated synthesis of PGE₂.

In non-stimulated RAW 264.7 cells, the pure compounds were relativelyinactive exhibiting IC₅₀ values of 231, 33 and 19 μg/mL, respectively,for carnosic, ursolic and oleanolic acids. This indicated a strongpreference for COX-2 inhibition over COX-1 for synthesis of PGE₂ in theRAW 264.7 target cell model. This extent of COX isozyme selectivity hasnever been reported in the literature and was an unexpected result. Inthe AGS gastric mucosal cell line, however, both the rosemary extractand oleanolic acid exhibited potent inhibition of PGE₂ synthesis.

Example 7 Synergistic Inhibition of PGE₂ Synthesis in Target Cells byHops CO₂-Extract in Combination with Triterpenoids Oleanolic Acid andUrsolic Acid

Equipment used, chemicals, cell handing and calculation of medianinhibitory concentrations were performed as previously described inExamples 1, 2 and 3. The hops CO2-extract was purchased from Hopunion,(Yakama, Wash.) and contained 30 to 60% alpha-acids and 15 to 45%beta-acids. Oleanolic and ursolic acids and were obtained from Sigma(St. Louis, Mo.) and were the highest purity commercially available(>98%).

Synergy of test components was quantified using the combination index(Cl) parameter. The CI of Chou-Talaly is based on the multipledrug-effect and is derived from enzyme kinetic models (Chou, T.-C. andTalalay, P. (1977) A simple generalized equation for the analysis ofmultiple inhibitions of Michaelis-Menten kinetic systems. J. Biol. Chem.252:6438-6442). The equation determines only the additive effect ratherthan synergism or antagonism. However, we define synergism as a morethan expected additive effect, and antagonism as a less than expectedadditive effect as proposed by Cho and Talalay Using the designation ofCI=1 as the additive effect, we obtain for mutually exclusive compoundsthat have the same mode of action or for mutually non-exclusive drugsthat have totally independent modes of action the followingrelationships: CI<1, =1, and >1 indicating synergism, additivity andantagonism, respectively.

Results—The 4:1 (CO₂-extract:triterpenoid) combination tested in RAW264.7 cells exhibited potent synergy over the entire dose-responsecurve. Combination indexes computed for both test materials at the IC₅₀,IC₇₅ and IC₉₀ are presented in Table 7. As described in this example,the synergy of these combinations covered a concentration range of 0.001to 50 μg/mL of each component of the combination.

TABLE 7 Computed Combination Indexes for the dose-response curves of 1:4combinations of a CO₂-extract of hops and the triterpenes oleanolic andursolic acid Test Material CI₅₀ CI₇₅ CI₉₀ Mean CI CO₂-Extract:Oleanolicacid [1:4] 0.514 0.461 0.414 0.463 CO₂-Extract:Ursolic acid [1:4] 0.5290.650 0.806 0.662

Example 8 Synergistic Inhibition of PGE₂ Synthesis by Hops Combinationswith an Extract of Rosemary in Target and Nontarget Cells

Summary—This example illustrates synergy of combinations of reducedisomerized alpha acids and rosemary extract on target A549 cells andsynergistic antagonism of rosemary inhibition of PGE₂ synthesis in AGSgastric mucosal cells.

Equipment used, chemicals, cell handing and calculation of medianinhibitory concentrations were performed as previously described inExamples 1, 2, 3 and 4. Several differences in the protocol for testingin the A549 cells were incorporated in this example. First, testmaterials were added to the medium 60 minutes prior to stimulation withIL-1β. Second, in the determination of dose-response curves, 5 μMarachidonic acid was used in place of the calcium ionophore A23187.Synergy of the combinations was computed as described in Example 7.

Results—Table 8 shows PGE₂ inhibition by reduced isomerized alpha-acids,rosemary extract and a 2:1 combinations of reduced isomerizedalpha-acids and rosemary extract in IL-1β stimulated A549 cells. Thiscell line represents a model target cell for anti-inflammatory efficacy.Median inhibitory concentrations for reduced isomerized alpha-acids androsemary extract independently were, respectively, 0.84 and 1.3 μg/mL.The 2:1 combination of reduced isomerized alpha-acids and rosemaryextract exhibited synergy at and below the median inhibitoryconcentration of the combination.

Table 9 shows inhibition of PGE₂ synthesis in the human gastric AGScells. These cells represent a model for gastrointestinal toxicity ofprostaglandin inhibitors. Test materials exhibiting inhibition of PGE₂synthesis in these cells would be expected to demonstrate gastricirritation and ulceration with chronic use. The inhibition of PGE₂synthesis by rosemary extract was synergistically antagonized by a 2:1combination of reduced isomerized alpha-acids and rosemary extract. Thisunexpected result represents a novel finding of synergistic antagonism.

TABLE 8 Median inhibitory concentrations and combination index for PGE₂inhibition by reduced isomerized alpha-acids, rosemary extract and acombination of isomerized alpha-acids and rosemary extract inIL-1β-stimulated A549 cells IC₅₀ Combination Index <1.0† Test Material[μg/ml] [μg/mL] Reduced isomerized alpha-acids 0.84 (RIAA) Rosemaryextract 1.3 RIAA:Rosemary 2:1 0.48 At 0.48 and below †The combinationindex was less than 1 over the portion of the dose-response curve at andbelow the IC50 value indicating synergistic inhibition of PGE₂ synthesisby the combination at these concentrations.

TABLE 9 Synergy of a 1:1 combination of reduced isomerized alpha-acidswith rosemary extract resulting in a reduction of PGE₂ inhibition in AGSgastric mucosal cells. IC₅₀ Test Material [μg/ml] Combination IndexReduced isomerized alpha-acids (RIAA) >25 — Rosemary 4.0 — RIAA:Rosemary1:1 >25 >1.0† †The combination index was greater than 1 over the entiredose-response curve indicating synergistic antagonism of PGE₂ inhibitionby the combination.

While this example only presents the combination of rosemary extractwith one of the hops derivative, reduced isomerized alpha-acids, itwould be obvious for one skilled in the art to assume to expect the sameresults with other hops derivatives that also show no PGE₂ inhibitionwith AGS cells at dose as high as 25 μg/mL. Examples of these hopsderivatives would include isomerized-alpha acids, hexahydro-isomerizedalpha acids, tetrahydro-iso-alpha acids and extracts of spent hops.

Example 9 Synergistic Inhibition of PGE₂ Synthesis by Reduced IsomerizedAlpha-Acids and Oleanolic Acid in Target Cells with No Effect on PGE₂Synthesis in Nontarget Cells

Summary—This example illustrates that reduced isomerized alpha-acidsexhibit strong synergy with the triterpene oleanolic acid in theinhibition of PGE₂ synthesis is the target A549 cells andsynergistically antagonize oleanolic acid inhibition of PGE₂ synthesisin gastric cells.

Equipment used, chemicals, cell handing and calculation of medianinhibitory concentrations were performed as previously described inExamples 1, 2, 3 and 4. Several differences in the protocol for testingin the A549 cells were incorporated in this example. First, testmaterials were added to the medium 60 minutes prior to stimulation withIL-1β. Second, in the determination of dose-response curves, A549 cellsremained in the presence of test material overnight before the samplingof media for PGE₂ determination. Synergy of the combinations wascomputed as described in Example 7. Reduced isomerized alpha-acids wereobtained as a one percent aqueous solution from John Haas, Inc. (Yakima,Wash.) and oleanolic acid was obtained from Sabinsa (Piscataway, N.J.)and was 80% pure. Synergy of the combinations was computed as describedin Example 7.

Results—Table 10 shows PGE₂ inhibition by oleanolic acid, reducedisomerized alpha-acids and various combinations of reduced isomerizedalpha-acids and oleanolic acid in A549 cells. This cell line representsa model target cell for anti-inflammatory efficacy. Median inhibitoryconcentrations for reduced isomerized alpha-acids and oleanolic acidindependently were, respectively, 0.03 and 0.39 μg/mL. Combinations ofreduced isomerized alpha-acids and oleanolic acid consisting of 10:1,5:1, and 1:5, respectively, exhibited synergy on the dose-response curveat combined concentrations of 0.11, 0.38 and 0.76 μg/mL. Thus, when thesum of the two components was equal to or less than 0.11, 0.38 or 0.76μg/mL, their ability to inhibit PGE₂ synthesis was greater than the sumof their individual activities.

TABLE 10 Median inhibitory concentrations and combination indexes forPGE₂ inhibition by reduced isomerized alpha-acids, oleanolic acid andfour combinations of isomerized alpha-acids and oleanolic acid inIL-1β-stimulated A549 cells. IC₅₀ Test Material [μg/mL] CombinationIndex <1.0 Oleanolic acid (80% Sabinsa) 0.390 — Reduced isomerizedalpha-acids 0.028 — (RIAA) RIAA:Oleanolic acid - [10:1] 0.042 At 0.11μg/mL and below RIAA:Oleanolic acid - [5:1] 0.059 At 0.38 μg/mL andbelow RIAA:Oleanolic acid - [1:5] 0.022 At 0.76 μg/mL and belowRIAA:Oleanolic acid - [1:10] 0.166 No †The combination index was lessthan 1 over the portion of the dose-response curve at the tabulatedvalues indicating synergistic inhibition of PGE₂ synthesis by thecombination at and below these concentrations.

Table 11 shows inhibition of PGE₂ synthesis in the human gastric AGScells. These cells represent a model for gastrointestinal toxicity ofprostaglandin inhibitors. Test materials exhibiting inhibition of PGE₂synthesis in these cells would be expected to demonstrate gastricirritation and ulceration with chronic use. The inhibition of PGE₂synthesis by oleanolic acid was synergistically antagonized by allcombinations with reduced isomerized alpha-acids. This unexpected resultrepresents a novel finding of synergistic antagonism.

TABLE 11 Synergy of reduced isomerized alpha-acids with oleanolic acidresulting in a reduction of PGE₂ inhibition in AGS gastric mucosal cellsIC₅₀ Combination Test Material [μg/mL] Index >1.0† Oleanolic acid 5.0 —Reduced isomerized alpha-acids >25 — (RIAA RIAA:Oleanolic acid -[10:1] >25 Antagonism RIAA:Oleanolic acid - [5:1] >25 AntagonismRIAA:Oleanolic acid - [1:5] >25 Antagonism RIAA:Oleanolic acid -[1:10] >25 Antagonism †When CI > 1.0 at the IC₅₀, the combination issaid to exhibit antagonism in the inhibition of PGE₂ synthesis by AGScells.

While this example only presents the combination of oleanolic acid withone of the hops derivative, reduced isomerized alpha-acids, it would beobvious for one skilled in the art to assume to expect the same resultswith other hops derivatives that also show no PGE₂ inhibition with AGScells at dose as high as 25 μg/mL. Examples of these hops derivativeswould include isomerized-alpha acids, hexahydro-isomerized alpha acids,tetrahydro-iso-alpha acids and extracts of spent hops.

Example 10 Synergistic Inhibition of PGE₂ Synthesis by a Combination ofReduced Isomerized Alpha Acids with Tryptanthrin in Target Cells with NoEffect on PGE₂ Synthesis in Nontarget Cells

Summary—This example illustrates a potent synergy of a 1:1 combinationof reduced isomerized alpha acids and tryptanthrin on target A549 cellsand synergistic antagonism of tryptanthrin inhibition of PGE₂ synthesisin AGS gastric mucosal cells.

Equipment used, chemicals, cell handing and calculation of medianinhibitory concentrations were performed as previously described inExamples 1, 2, 3, 4 and 9. Reduced isomerized alpha-acids were obtainedas a one percent aqueous solution from John Haas, Inc. (Yakima, Wash.)and tryptanthrin was obtained from Waco Chemicals (Richmond, Va.) andwas the highest purity commercially available. Several differences inthe protocol for testing in the A549 cells were incorporated in thisexample. First, test materials were added to the medium 60 minutes priorto stimulation with IL-1β. Second, in the determination of dose-responsecurves, A549 cells remained in the presence of test material overnightbefore the sampling of media for PGE₂ determination. Synergy of thecombinations was computed as described in Example 7.

Results—Table 12 shows PGE₂ inhibition by reduced isomerizedalpha-acids, tryptanthrin and a 1:1 combination of reduced isomerizedalpha-acids and tryptanthrin in IL-1β stimulated A549 cells. This cellline represents a model target cell for anti-inflammatory efficacy.Median inhibitory concentrations for reduced isomerized alpha-acids andtryptanthrin independently were, respectively, 0.0.028 and 0.30 μg/mL.The 1:1 combination of reduced isomerized alpha-acids and tryptanthrinexhibited synergy over the entire dose-response curve.

Table 13 shows inhibition of PGE₂ synthesis in the human gastric AGScells. These cells represent a model for gastrointestinal toxicity ofprostaglandin inhibitors. Test materials exhibiting inhibition of PGE₂synthesis in these cells would be expected to demonstrate gastricirritation and ulceration with chronic use. The inhibition of PGE₂synthesis by tryptanthin was synergistically antagonized by a 1:1combination of reduced isomerized alpha-acids and tryptanthrin orconjugates thereof. This unexpected result represents a novel finding ofsynergistic antagonism.

TABLE 12 Median inhibitory concentrations and combination index for PGE₂inhibition by reduced isomerized alpha-acids, tryptanthrin and acombination of isomerized alpha-acids and tryptanthrin inIL-1β-stimulated A549 cells IC₅₀ Test Material [μg/mL] Combination IndexReduced isomerized alpha-acids RIAA 0.028 — Tryptanthrin 0.300 —RIAA:Tryptanthrin - [1:1] 3.1 × 10⁻⁷ <1.0† †The combination index wasless than 1 over the entire dose-response curve indicating synergisticinhibition of PGE₂ synthesis by the combination.

TABLE 13 Synergy of combinations of reduced isomerized alpha-acids withtryptanthrin resulting in a reduction of PGE₂ inhibition in AGS gastricmucosal cells. IC₅₀ Test Material [μg/mL] Combination Index Reducedisomerized alpha-acids (RIAA) >25 — Tryptanthrin 4.2 —RIAA:Tryptanthrin - [1:1] >25 >1.0† †The combination index was greaterthan 1 over the entire dose-response curve indicating synergisticantagonism of PGE₂ inhibition by the combination.

While this example only presents the combination of trypanthrin with oneof the hops derivative, reduced isomerized alpha-acids, it would beobvious for one skilled in the art to assume to expect the same resultswith other hops derivatives that also show no PGE₂ inhibition with AGScells at dose as high as 25 μg/mL. Examples of these hops derivativeswould include isomerized-alpha acids, hexahydro-isomerized alpha acids,tetrahydro-iso-alpha acids and extracts of spent hops.

Example 11 Ex Vivo Inhibition of PGE₂ Synthesis by a Plasma Sample froma Human Receiving a Combination Containing Hops Derivatives, a RosemaryExtract and Oleanolic Acid

Summary—This example demonstrates the presence of PGE₂ inhibitingmaterials in a human subject following ingestion of a 5:5:1 combinationof reduced isomerized alpha acids, rosemary extract and oleanolic acidthree times per day for five days.

Equipment used, chemicals, RAW 264.7 cell handing and calculation ofPGE₂ concentrations were performed as previously described in Examples1, 2, and 3. Reduced isomerized alpha acids, rosemary extract andoleanolic acid were as described in Examples 3, 6 and 7, respectively.Gel caps were made to contain 200 mg reduced isomerized alpha acids, 200mg rosemary and 40 mg oleanolic acid in an oil base. Plasma samples wereobtained from a human volunteer prior to and five days after consumingthree capsules per day for five days. Capsules were taken atapproximately eight-hour intervals throughout the day. On the fifth day,blood was drawn one hour before taking the last capsule and 1, 2, 4 and7 hours after dosing. All PGE₂ assays in plasma samples were replicatedeight times. Outliers were defined and eliminated if the value was morethan three standard deviations from the group mean computed without theperceived outlier. Raw data with and without the outliers were graphed.Concentrations of test material in plasma relating to percent PGE₂inhibition were estimated using a standard curve of the combination incommercial plasma (Gibco, Grand Island, N.Y.).

FIG. 7[A] illustrates the inhibition of PGE₂ synthesis by the plasmasamples at the indicated times. A 9- to 3-fold increase in PGE₂inhibition was observed during the first post-dosing hour. Effectivehalf-life (time to reduce the ability to inhibit PGE₂ synthesis byone-half) of the test material was approximately four hours.

Estimates of test material relating to the observed percentageinhibition of PGE₂ synthesis in RAW 264.7 cells are presented in FIG.7[B]. Using only the data with outliers removed, a 12.5-fold increase intest material concentration was noted during the first hour. A maximalconcentration of 880 ng/mL plasma was seen at both the 1 and 2post-dosing hours. The concentration half-live was approximately 2.2hours. The lack of consistency between the effective half-life andconcentration half-life may be inferred to be due to the synergy ofcomponents in the formulation. Efficacy is extended due to positive andsynergistic interactions among the isomerized alpha acids, the myriad ofcompounds in the rosemary extract and oleanolic acid as has beendemonstrated by the examples in this application.

Example 12 Normalization of Joint Function Following Trauma

A representative composition of the preferred embodiments as a dietarysupplement would be in an oral formulation, i.e. tablets or gel capsthat would supply one of the following combinations: 0.1 to 10 mgisocohumulone/kg per day; 0.01 to 10 mg dihydroadhumulone/kg per day;0.01 to 10 mg tetrahydro-isocohumulone/kg per day; 0.01 to 10 mg/kg perday of hexahydro-isohumulone/kg per day for a 70 kg person.

Normalization of joint movement following physical trauma due toexercise or repetitive movement stress would be expected to occurfollowing two to ten doses. This result would be expected in allanimals.

Example 13 Normalization of Joint Function Following Trauma

A representative composition of the preferred embodiments as a dietarysupplement would be in an oral formulation, i.e. tablets or gel capsthat would supply one of the following combinations:

17 mg reduced isomerized alpha-acid/kg per day, 17 mg rosemaryextract/kg per day and 17 mg ursolic acid/kg per day;

17 mg reduced isomerized alpha-acid/kg per day, 17 mg rosemaryextract/kg per day and 3.4 mg ursolic acid/kg per day;

34 mg reduced isomerized alpha-acid/kg per day, 34 mg rosemaryextract/kg per day and 3.4 mg ursolic acid/kg per day;

340 mg reduced isomerized alpha-acid/kg per day, 340 mg rosemaryextract/kg per day and 3.4 mg ursolic acid/kg per day;

17 mg reduced isomerized alpha-acid/kg per day, 17 mg rosemaryextract/kg per day and 85 mg ursolic acid/kg per day;

17 mg reduced isomerized alpha-acid/kg per day, 17 mg rosemaryextract/kg per day and 170 mg ursolic acid/kg per day; or

17 mg reduced isomerized alpha-acid/kg per day, 17 mg rosemaryextract/kg per day and 1700 mg ursolic acid/kg per day for a 70 kgperson.

Normalization of joint movement following physical trauma due toexercise or repetitive movement stress would be expected to occurfollowing two to ten doses. This result would be expected in allanimals.

Example 14 Clinical Effectiveness of Lotion Formulations in theTreatment of Acne Rosacea

A lotion designed to contain one of the following:

-   -   1. 0.1% wt of the alpha-acid humulone;    -   2. 0.1% wt of the isomerized alpha-acid isocohumulone;    -   3. 0.1% wt of the reduced isomerized alpha-acid        dihydro-adhumulone;    -   4. 0.1% wt of the tetrahydroisoalpha-acid        tetrahydro-isocohumulone; or    -   5. 0.1% wt of the hexahydroisoalpha-acid hexahydro-isohumulone        is applied to affected areas of patients who have exhibited acne        rosacea as diagnosed by their health practitioner and confirmed        by an independent board-certified dermatologist.

Self-evaluation tests and are administered one week prior to the studyto quantify the surface area affected and redness. In addition, similarvariables are scored by the professional clinical staff not aware of thepatients treatment status. These evaluations are repeated on Days 0, 7,14 and 21.

Patients are randomly assigned to the test formulation or placebo at thestart of the study. The test formulation and placebo are applied to theaffected area one or two times per day. Treatment for health conditionssuch as diabetes, hypertension, etc. is allowed during the study. Scoresare statistically compared between the test formulation and the placebofor each of the four observational periods. Patients treated with thecomposition of the preferred embodiments in a lotion formulation areconsidered improved if the patients' scores improve by greater than 20%from the pre-test scores within each category evaluated. The percentageof persons exhibiting improvement is compared between the combinationformulations and the placebo control. The difference between the twogroups is considered statistically significant if the probability ofrejecting the null hypothesis when true is less than five percent.

Example 15 Clinical Effectiveness of Lotion Formulations in theTreatment of Acne Rosacea

A lotion designed to contain one of the following:

-   -   1. 0.1% wt of the alpha-acid humulone and 0.1% trypanthrin;    -   2. 0.1% wt of the isomerized alpha-acid isocohumulone and 0.1%        trypanthrin;    -   3. 0.1% wt of the reduced isomerized alpha-acid        dihydro-adhumulone and 0.1% tryptanthrin;    -   4. 0.1% wt of the tetrahydroisoalpha-acid        tetrahydro-isocohumulone and 0.1% tryptanthrin; or    -   5. 0.1% wt of the hexahydroisoalpha-acid hexahydro-isohumulone        and 0.1% tryptanthrin        is applied to affected areas of patients who have exhibited acne        rosacea as diagnosed by their health practitioner and confirmed        by an independent board-certified dermatologist.

Self-evaluation tests and are administered one week prior to the studyto quantify the surface area affected and redness. In addition, similarvariables are scored by the professional clinical staff not aware of thepatients treatment status. These evaluations are repeated on Days 0, 7,14 and 21.

Patients are randomly assigned to the test formulation or placebo at thestart of the study. The test formulation and placebo are applied to theaffected area one or two times per day. Treatment for health conditionssuch as diabetes, hypertension, etc. is allowed during the study. Scoresare statistically compared between the test formulation and the placebofor each of the four observational periods. Patients treated with thecomposition of the preferred embodiments in a lotion formulation areconsidered improved if the patients' scores improve by greater than 20%from the pre-test scores within each category evaluated. The percentageof persons exhibiting improvement is compared between the combinationformulations and the placebo control. The difference between the twogroups is considered statistically significant if the probability ofrejecting the null hypothesis when true is less than five percent.

Example 16 Clinical Effectiveness of a Lotion Formulation in theTreatment of Psoriasis

This example is performed in the same manner as described in Examples 14and 15, except that the composition is applied to affected areas ofpatients who have exhibited psoriasis as diagnosed by their ownpractitioner and confirmed by an independent board-certifieddermatologist. Self-evaluation tests are administered one week prior tothe study to quantify the surface area affected and skin condition. Inaddition, similar variables are scored by the professional clinicalstaff not aware of the patients treatment status. These evaluations arerepeated on Days 0, 7, 30 and 60.

Patients are randomly assigned to the test formulation or placebo at thestart of the study. The test formulation and placebo are applied to theaffected area one or two times per day. Treatment for health conditionssuch as diabetes, hypertension, etc. is allowed during the study. Scoresare statistically compared between the test formulation and the placebofor each of the four observational periods. Patients treated with thecomposition of the preferred embodiments as the test lotion formulationare considered improved if the patients' scores improve by greater than20% from the pre-test scores within each category evaluated. Thepercentage of persons exhibiting improvement is compared between thetest formulation and the placebo control. The difference between the twogroups is considered statistically significant if the probability ofrejecting the null hypothesis when true is less than five percent.

Example 17 Clinical Effectiveness of a Formulation in the Treatment ofAlzheimer's Disease

An oral formulation as described in Examples 12 and 13 is administeredto patients who have manifested an early stage of Alzheimer's Disease(AD), as diagnosed by their practitioner and confirmed by an independentboard-certified neurologist. Two weeks before the clinical trial, thepatients undergo appropriate psychoneurological tests such as the MiniMental Status Exam (MMSE), the Alzheimer Disease Assessment Scale(ADAS), the Boston Naming Test (BNT), and the Token Test (TT).Neuropsychological tests are repeated on Day 0, 6 weeks and 3 months ofthe clinical trial. The tests are performed by neuropsychologists whoare not aware of the patient's treatment regimen.

Patients are randomly assigned to the test formulation or placebo at thestart of the study. The test formulation and placebo are taken orallyone or two times per day. Treatment for conditions such as diabetes,hypertension, etc. is allowed during the study. Scores are statisticallycompared between the test formulation and the placebo for each of thethree observational periods. Without treatment, the natural course of ADis significant deterioration in the test scores during the course of theclinical trial. Patients treated with the composition of the preferredembodiments as the test formulation are considered improved if thepatients' scores remain the same or improve during the course of theclinical trial.

Example 18 Oral Formulation in the Treatment and Prevention of ColonCancer

An oral formulation as described in Examples 12 and 13 is administeredto patients who have manifested an early stage of colon cancer asdiagnosed by their own practitioner and confirmed by a independentboard-certified oncologist.

Patients are randomly assigned to the test formulation or a placebo atthe start of the study. The test formulation and placebo are takenorally one or two times per day. Treatment for conditions such asdiabetes, hypertension, etc. is allowed during the study. Endoscopicevaluations are made at one, two, six and twelve months. Evidence ofreappearance of the tumor during any one of the four follow-up clinicalvisits is considered a treatment failure. The percentage of treatmentfailures is compared between the test formulation and the placebocontrol. Under the experimental conditions described, the test materialis expected to decrease the tumor incidence with respect to the controlgroup. The difference between the two groups is considered statisticallysignificant if the probability of rejecting the null hypothesis whentrue is less than five percent.

Example 19 Oral Formulation for the Treatment of Irritable BowelSyndrome

An oral formulation as described in Examples 12 and 13 is administeredto patients who have manifested irritable bowel syndrome as diagnosed bytheir practitioner. Normal bowel functioning is restored within 48hours.

Example 20 Normalization of Joint Functioning in Osteoarthritis

Using compositions described in Examples 12 and 13 normalization ofjoint stiffness due to osteoarthritis occurs following five to twentydoses, in the presence or absence of glucosamine or chondroitin sulfate.In addition, the composition does not interfere with the normal jointrebuilding effects of these two proteoglycan constituents, unliketraditional non-steroidal anti-inflammatory agents.

Example 21 Mite Dust Allergens Activate PGE₂ Biosynthesis in A549Pulmonary Cells

Summary—This example illustrates that house mite dust allergens caninduce PGE₂ biosynthesis in pulmonary epithelial cells.

Background

Sensitivity to allergens is a problem for an increasing number ofconsumers. This issue has been complicated by a surprising increase inasthma over the past few years. Asthma suffers are especially sensitiveto airborne allergens. Allergy rates are also on the rise. This givesrise to increased awareness of the causes of allergy symptoms and how todecrease the associated discomfort. Approximately 10% of the populationbecome hypersensitized (allergic) upon exposure to antigens from avariety of environmental sources. Those antigens that induce immediateand/or delayed types of hypersensitivity are known as allergens. Theseinclude products of grasses, trees, weeds, animal dander, insects, food,drugs, and chemicals. Genetic predisposition of an individual isbelieved to play a role in the development of immediate allergicresponses such as atopy and anaphylaxis whose symptoms include hayfever, asthma, and hives.

Many allergens are protein-based molecules, and these protein allergenscan originate from many sources. It has been know for some time that oneof the most common sources of allergens in a house is from dust mites.Of course, as is the case with all allergens, only certain people areallergic to dust mite allergens. But this group of people can be quitelarge in many areas, especially in hot humid areas. For example, in thesoutheastern United States of America, where it is both hot and humidfor much of the year, the incidence of house dust mite allergies in thegeneral population can be as high as 25%. House dust mites thrive inplush carpets, overstuffed upholstery, cushy bed comforters and thelike.

Methods

Mite dust allergen isolation—Dermatophagoides farinae are the Americanhouse dust mite. D. farinae were cultured on a 1:1 ratio of PurinaLaboratory Chow (Ralston Purina, Co, St. Louis, Mo.) and Fleischmann'sgranulated dry yeast (Standard Brands, Inc. New York, N.Y.) at roomtemperature and 75% humidity. Live mites were aspirated from the culturecontainer as they migrated from the medium, killed by freezing,desiccated and stored at 0% humidity. The allergenic component of themite dust was extracted with water at ambient temperature. Five-hundredmg of mite powder were added to 5 mL of water (1:10 w/v) in a 15 mLconical centrifuge tube (VWR, Rochester, N.Y.), shaken for one minuteand allowed to stand overnight at ambient temperature. The next day, theaqueous phase was filtered using a 0.2 μm disposable syringe filter(Nalgene, Rochester, N.Y.). The filtrate was termed mite dust allergenand used to test for induction of PGE₂ biosynthesis in A549 pulmonaryepithelial cells.

Cell culture and treatment—This experiment involved the human airwayepithelial cell line, A549 (American Type Culture Collection, Bethesda,Md.). The cells were cultured and treated as previously described inExample 2. Mite allergen was added to the culture medium to achieve afinal concentration of 1000 ng/mL. Twenty-four hours later, the culturemedium was sampled for PGE₂ concentration.

PGE₂ assay—Determination of PGE₂ in the culture medium was performed aspreviously described in Example 1.

Statistical analysis—Means of eight replicates per treatment werecomputed using Excel® spreadsheets (Microsoft, Redmond, Wash.).

Results

Mite allergen treatment increased PGE₂ biosynthesis 6-fold in A549 cellsrelative to the solvent treated controls (FIG. 8).

Example 22 Hops Derivatives Inhibit Mite Dust Allergen Activation ofPGE₂ Biosynthesis in A549 Pulmonary Cells

Summary—This example illustrates that hops derivatives are capable ofinhibiting the PGE₂ stimulatory effects of mite dust allergens in A549pulmonary cells.

Methods

The cell line and testing procedures are as described in Example 22. Inaddition to mite dust allergen, test materials included Hops fractions(1) alpha hop (1% alpha acids; AA), (2) aromahop OE (10% beta acids and2% isomerized alpha acids, (3) isohop (isomerized alpha acids; IAA), (4)beta acid solution (beta acids BA), (5) hexahop gold (hexahydroisomerized alpha acids; HHIAA), (6) redihop (reduced isomerized-alphaacids; RIAA), and (7) tetrahop (tetrahydro-iso-alpha acids THIAA). Testmaterials at a final concentration of 10 μg/mL were added 60 minutesprior to the addition of the mite dust allergen.

Results

Table 15 depicts the extent of inhibition of PGE₂ biosynthesis by hopsderivatives in A549 pulmonary cells stimulated by mite dust allergen.All hops derivatives were capable of significantly inhibiting thestimulatory effects of mite dust allergens.

TABLE 15 PGE₂ inhibition by hops derviatives in A549 pulmonaryepithelial cells stimulated by mite dust allergen Percent Inhibition ofTest Material PGE₂ Biosynthesis Alpha hop (AA) 81 Aromahop OE 84 Isohop(IAA) 78 Beta acids (BA) 83 Hexahop (HHIAA) 82 Redihop (RIAA) 81Tetrahop (THIAA) 76

In conclusion, it would also be useful to identify a natural formulationof compounds that would inhibit expression of COX-2, inhibitprostaglandin synthesis selectively in target cells, or inhibitinflammation response selectively in target cells.

A preferred embodiment comprises compositions containing at least onefraction isolated or derived from hops (Humulus lupulus). Examples offractions isolated or derived from hops are alpha acids, isoalpha acids,reduced isoalpha acids, tetra-hydroisoalpha acids, hexa-hydroisoalphaacids, beta acids, and spent hops. Preferred compounds of fractionsisolated or derived from hops, include, but are not limited to,humulone, cohumulone, adhumulone, isohumulone, isocohumulone,isoadhumulone, dihydro-isohumulone, dihydro-isocohumulone,dihydro-adhumulone, tetrahydro-isohumulone, tetrahydro-isocohumulone,tetrahydro-adhumulone, hexahydro-isohumulone, hexahydro-isocohumulone,and hexahydro-adhumulone. Preferred compounds can also bearsubstituents, such as halogens, ethers, and esters.

Another embodiment comprises composition containing tryptanthrin andconjugates thereof.

Other embodiments relate to combinations of components. One embodimentrelates to compositions that include, as a first component, an activeingredient isolated or derived from an extract of hops and as a secondcomponent at least one member selected from the group consisting ofrosemary (Rosmarinus officinalis L.), an extract or compound derivedfrom rosemary, a triterpene species or derivatives or conjugatesthereof, and tryptanthrin or conjugates thereof. Another embodimentrelates to compositions that include, as a first component, tryptanthrinor conjugates thereof and as a second component at least one memberselected from the group consisting of an active ingredient isolated orderived from an extract of hops, rosemary, an extract or compoundderived from rosemary, and a triterpene species or derivatives orconjugates thereof.

It will be readily apparent to those skilled in the art that variouschanges and modifications of an obvious nature may be made withoutdeparting from the spirit of the invention, and all such changes andmodifications are considered to fall within the scope of the inventionas defined by the appended claims. Such changes and modifications wouldinclude, but not be limited to, the incipient ingredients added toaffect the capsule, tablet, lotion, food or bar manufacturing process aswell as vitamins, herbs, flavorings and carriers. Other such changes ormodifications would include the use of other herbs or botanical productscontaining the combinations of the preferred embodiments disclosedabove. Many additional modifications and variations of the embodimentsdescribed herein may be made without departing from the scope, as isapparent to those skilled in the art. The specific embodiments describedherein are offered by way of example only.

1-115. (canceled)
 116. An anti-inflammatory therapeutic compositionconsisting essentially of an anti-inflammatory therapeutically effectiveamount of a component selected from the group consisting oftetrahydro-isohumulone, tetrahydro-isocohumulone,tetrahydro-isoadhumulone, hexahydro-isohumulone,hexahydro-isocohumulone, and hexahydro-isoadhumulone; and about 0.01 to500 mg of a rosemary extract.
 117. The composition of claim 116, whereinthe composition comprises about 0.5 to 10,000 mg of the component. 118.The composition of claim 117, wherein the composition comprises about 50to 7,500 mg of the component.
 119. The composition of claim 116, whereinthe composition comprises about 0.001 to 10 weight percent of thecomponent.
 120. The composition of claim 119, wherein the compositioncomprises about 0.1 to 1 weight percent of the component.
 121. Thecomposition of claim 116, wherein the composition comprises about 0.001to 10 weight percent of the rosemary extract.
 122. The composition ofclaim 121, wherein the composition comprises about 0.1 to 1 weightpercent of the rosemary extract.
 123. The composition of claim 116,wherein a ratio of the component to the rosemary extract is in the rangeof about 100:1 to about 1:100.
 124. The composition of claim 123,wherein the ratio of the component to the rosemary extract is in therange of about 50:1 to about 1:50.
 125. The composition of claim 124,wherein the composition further comprises a pharmaceutically acceptablecarrier.
 126. An anti-inflammatory therapeutic composition consistingessentially of an anti-inflammatory therapeutically effective amount ofa component selected from the group consisting oftetrahydro-isohumulone, tetrahydro-isocohumulone,tetrahydro-isoadhumulone, hexahydro-isohumulone,hexahydro-isocohumulone, and hexahydro-isoadhumulone; and about 0.5 to5,000 mg of a rosemary extract.
 127. The composition of claim 126,wherein the composition comprises about 5 to 2,000 mg of the rosemaryextract.
 128. The composition of claim 126, wherein the compositioncomprises about 0.5 to 10,000 mg of the component.
 129. The compositionof claim 128, wherein the composition comprises about 50 to 7,500 mg ofthe component.
 130. The composition of claim 126, wherein thecomposition comprises about 0.001 to 10 weight percent of the component.131. The composition of claim 130, wherein the composition comprisesabout 0.1 to 1 weight percent of the component.
 132. The composition ofclaim 126, wherein the composition comprises about 0.001 to 10 weightpercent of the rosemary extract.
 133. The composition of claim 132,wherein the composition comprises about 0.1 to 1 weight percent of therosemary extract.
 134. The composition of claim 126, wherein a ratio ofthe component to the rosemary extract is in the range of about 100:1 toabout 1:100.
 135. The composition of claim 134, wherein the ratio of thecomponent to the rosemary extract is in the range of about 50:1 to about1:50.